 |
Erik Ribsskog <eribsskog@gmail.com> |
Problems with hi-jacking of web-shop/Fwd: Hello Dr. Erwin,
|
Erik Ribsskog <eribsskog@gmail.com> |
Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 3:09 AM | |
|
To: Harry Erwin <harry.erwin@sunderland.ac.uk> | ||
| ||
Stikkord: Moorcrofts Solicitors.
-
Jeg sendte en ny e-post til Dr. Harry Erwin, foreleser i E-Commerce, fra University of Sunderland
Gmail – Problems with hi-jacking of web-shop/Fwd: Hello Dr. Erwin,
-
Her kan man se litt om hvor korrupte disse landa som England, Tyskland og USA er. (In Norwegian)
Google Mail – Vedlegg/Fwd: Anmeldelse av advokatbyrået Moorcrofts, i Liverpool, for 'mob'-virksomhet
Erik Ribsskog
<eribsskog@gmail.com>
Vedlegg/Fwd: Anmeldelse av advokatbyrået Moorcrofts, i Liverpool, for ‘mob’-virksomhet
Erik Ribsskog
<eribsskog@gmail.com>
Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 12:56 PM
To:
post.oslo@politiet.no
Her er linken med brevet fra Moorcrofts, og min klage:http://johncons-mirror.
blogspot.com/2008/10/ resolution-form.html Med vennlig hilsen
Erik Ribsskog
———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Erik Ribsskog <eribsskog@gmail.com>
Date: 2009/4/9
Subject: Anmeldelse av advokatbyrået Moorcrofts, i Liverpool, for
‘mob’-virksomhet
Hei,
jeg sender dette til dere, for det Merseyside-politiet, det stoler jeg
ikke noe på.
Men her er det snakk om at et advokatbyrå, i Liverpool, driver å
ødelegger ryktet mitt.
De skriver at jeg har plaget en som jobber hos dem, og insistert i å
prate med henne.
Nei, hun var kontaktpersonen min.
Og de skriver at hun hadde sagt at en annen der var den passende
personen for meg
å prate med.
Men det hadde hun ikke gjort klart, det var sånn, at hvis de tok
saken, så skulle den
personen ta saken.
Men dette var ikke avgjort.
Det som skjedde, var at de la på, under en telefonsamtale.
Og kontoret deres er rett borti gata her, så da gikk jeg bort på
kontoret, for jeg ville
ikke være uhøflig, siden dette var om en viktig rettsak, mot
Bertelsmanns Microsoft
skandinaviske produkt-aktivering, her i Liverpool.
Så dette var mob-virsomhet, er klart for meg.
Og dette har fortsatt gjennom systemet, det samme greiene i the Law Society og
hos the Legal Services Ombudsman.
Så her har nok etterettning, eller noe, motarbeidet min arbeidssak.
Og hvorfor det?
Jo, fordi det er det store firmaet Bertelsmann i Tyskland og det store
firmaet Microsoft,
i USA, som er mine motparter.
Og hva skjer da?
Joda, da herjer disse store firmaene og sikker USA og Tysklands
etterettningsorganisasjoner
fritt mot meg.
Så her er mine rettigheter null verdt, mot disse storkaptialistene,
som ikke bryr seg om hva som
er rett eller galt, men bare kjøper eller bestikker, eller hva de driver med.
Så her er det fy skam til Bertelsmann og Microsoft.
Og politiet i England er like korrupte, så jeg sender dette til Oslo.
Så sånn er det.
Med vennlig hilsen
Erik Ribsskog
-
Letter from the Legal Services Ombudsman
PS.
This is about that the Law Society let the two law-firms mess with me, and about that the Legal Services Ombudsman let the Law Society get away with this.
-
Untitled Post
Resolution form
Part 1:
Alison Lobb
Morecrofts Solcitors
Ground Floor, Tithebarn House, 1-5 Tithebarn Street, Liverpool, L2 2NZ.
Solicitors reference: I called your office last week, and I was at your office today,
agreeing that I would send this resolution form to your companies e-mail address.
My name:
Erik Ribsskog
Flat 3
5 Leather Lane
Liverpool
L2 2AE
Phone-number: 0151 236 3298.
Mobile: 0775 834 9954.
Part 2:
The person dealing with my case is or was:
First it was Eleanor Pool who dealt with the case as a duty solicitor from Morecrofts
on the meeting in the CAB on 27/2.
Then, after I agreed with Pool on that I would pay for the case with a payment-plan
type of founding, then the case was dealt with by Mr. Milletts secretary Samantha,
on behalf of Mr. Millett.
My complaint is:
1. Pool told me on 11/4 that it would be ok for me to pay for the case with a payment-
plan type of founding.
Yet, when Samantha called me on 24/4, (after I had called Pool earlier that day to
ask why noone had called me about a meeting, like we had agreed on when I went
to Morecrofts on 11/4), she said that I first had to pay Morecrofts £250, before I could
get to speak with Mr. Millett about the case.
I told Samantha, on the phone on 24/4, that this was not what I had agreed with Pool.
I told Samantha that Pool had said it would be ok with a payment-plan type of founding,
but Samantha said that it wouldn’t be possible with a payment-plan.
I said that I needed some more time to think about this, and after this phone-call, I
have been in contact with the Law Society and others, to get advice on how to deal with
this situation.
I’ve also been in regular contact with Samantha after this, to update her about what I’ve
been doing to try to sort with the founding, and more, regarding the case.
I took some weeks for it to get clear to me exactly how I should go forward to complain
about this approperatly, but last week, I recieved a Resolution form from the Law Society,
and I called your reseption on 18/5, asking for the name of the solicitor who deals with
complaints, and also informing on that I would go to your office this week with the
resolution form.
I asked the reseptionist to inform Samantha about this, and also asked her if she could
inform the other persons in the company that she thought needed to be informed about
this.
Complaint 1A: I would like to complain about that I was promised by Pool on 11/4 that the
case could be payed for with a payment-plan founding solution, but that Samantha
later told me that the case couldn’t be payed for with a payment-plan founding solution.
I think that when Pool tells me that this is ok on 11/4, then what she says as a
representative of Morecrofts is binding for the company, and then it shouldn’t
be changed later by the company.
Complaint 1B: I would also like to complain about that even if I told Samantha that
I had agreed with Pool on 11/4 to pay for the case with a payment-plan founding
solution, Samantha still insisted on that this wasn’t possible.
I think Samantha shouldn’t have ignored what I was saying. And if she didn’t trust me,she could have checked this with Pool, and got it confirmed that we had already
agreed on that I could pay for the case with a payment-plan solution.
2. When Samantha called me on 24/4, she said told me that she had been trying to
call me on my mobile three times since 11/4. (To set up a meeting for me with Mr.
Millett, must have been the reason for her to call me. I agreed with Pool on 11/4,
that someone from your company would call me to set up a meeting with Mr.
Millett about the case.)
Since I was in contact with the police in January, (and also started applying for new jobs
etc. in January), I have been carefull with having the ring-tone level on my two mobile-
phones on a high level, so that I shouldn’t miss calles from new employers, the police
etc.
(And I try to use my newest mobile for buisness-calls, but I might have given Pool the
number to my old mobile on the meeting at the CAB on 27/2, since it got a bit stressful
in the meeting that day, since the meeting was only scheduled to last thirty minutes,
and I wasnt aware of that untill the thirthy minutes had passed, so it could be that I
gave her the number to my old mobile, from old habit, when Pool asked me for my
contact-information).
But because I had taken care to have both the phones switched on, and also have
the ring-tone volume-level on loud on both mobiles, then I found it very unlikely that
I would manage to miss three phone-calls from Morecrofts between 11/4 and 24/4.
So I asked Samantha if she had been calling from the number that are on your
letters, and first she didn’t answer, she just asked me why I was asking so many
questions.
I answered that I was really only asking one question, and then she answered that she
had been calling from that number.
After the call, I checked the call-registry on both my mobiles, just to be 100% certain,
but I couldn’t find any calls from Morecrofts on any of the call-registries.
Complaint 2A: I would like to complain about that noone called me from Morcrofts to
set up a meeting about the case, even if Pool on 11/4 said that someone would.
Complaint 2B: I would like to complain about that Samantha said that she had tryed
to call me three times between 11/4 and 24/4, on my mobile, but this can’t be right,
since on my there haven’t been any calls from Morecrofts to any of my mobiles, in
this periode.
3. On the meeting with Pool on the CAB on 27/2, I wasn’t informed on that the meeting
only lasted thirty minutes, untill Pool informed me about this when the thirty minutes
had passed.
Complaint 3: I think Pool should have informed me on that the meeting only lasted
thirthy minutes, before the meeting started, then it would have been possible for
me to plan which things I wanted to bring up in the meeting, in a way so that
I could get the most imortant things brought up before the meeting had ended.
4. In the meeting on 27/2, Pool adviced me on telling the details of the case to
the jobcentre, who then would have given it on to my old employer.
(This was regarding a question-form that the jobcentre had sent me, and which
they only gave me a week to reply on).
Since I wasn’t aware on that the meeting only lasted thirty minutes, untill the
thirty minutes had passed, the meeting got a bit stressful at the end.
I only had a couple of days left to deliver the answer to the jobcentre-form or
else I could have lost my allowance, since I was unemployed at that time.
So I reckoned that this was about the only chance I would get to get adviceon how to answer the form, since I reckoned that it would take more than
a couple of days to arrange a new similar meeting.
So I asked if Pool could have a look at the form before we ended the meeting.
Then Pool advised me to answer the questions to the job-centre.Complaint 4A: I’m not sure if Pool should have adviced me to answer the
questions to the job-centre, since those questions were about the same
things that were covered about the case.
So, I think that, since that I from November last year, have been in contact
with the police, the CAB, and your company about this case in which
these questions are dealt with, then I think that these questions shouldnt
been dealt with at the jobcentre, or other places, untill the legal-process
that I started by contacting the police in Novemeber had ended.
Complaint 4B: I’m not an expert on this, but this is how I see this after thinking
more about this. I reckon that Pool should maybe have set up a new meeting
to disuss the rest of issues that we didn’t have time to disuss on the first
meeting. (I’m not an expert on how duty solicitor meetings should be
arranged, but I reckon that if I want to find out if this was done right, I should
write it in this form now.)
5. I didn’t know anything about legal-aid and how the other different founding
alternatives (payment plan etc.), for cases that was sent from the police,
via the CAB, to a duty solicitor, untill the weeks after the meeting on
the CAB on 27/2.
Complaint 5: I think that I should have been informed on in the meeting
at the CAB on 27/2 that Morecrofts only accepted founding from private
founds (and not from legal-aid).
I didnt get aware of this untill Pool told me this when I went to your officeon 19/3.
I think that since this was an employement case, I should have been
informed on that it wasn’t possible to pay for the case by legal-aid.
6. When Samantha called me on 24/4, I remember that she kept
interupting me all the time while we were speaking about the case
and the things regarding the case.
At the end of the call I explained to her that I fould it difficult to comunicate
with her, when she kept interupting me all the time.
I got her to agree on that we should try to speak only one at the time
for the rest of the call, and we managed to do that for the remainding
one or two minutes of the call.
Complaint 6: I think that it shouldn’t be necessary to make special
agreements about that one should interrupt eachother during a call.
I think people working for legal firms, and that are used to dealing
with members of the puplic regarding legal cases, should know this
from before.
So I would like to complain about this anyway, even if it went fine with
the call for the last one or two minutes.
7. When I called Samantha on 11/5, I explained that I had tryed to call
her earler that week, and that I had left her a voice-mail etc.
Samantha said that I could have called her the day before, that she
was in then.
But I had try to call her the day before, and the reseptionist had toldme that Samantha wasn’t in that day.
Also Samantha told me that I should have left her a voice-message,
even if I did this when I tryed to call her on 9/5.
I had also told the reseptionist to tell Samantha that I had been trying
to call her on 10/5.
On 8/5 I also tryed to call Morecrofts on the number that is on their
letters, at around 3.30 pm. (I tryed to call at least twice around that
time on your main phone-number, 0151 236 8871).
Complaint 7A: So I’d like to complain about your company not answering
the phone on 8/5, and on Samantha saying that I should have left a
voice-mail when I had done it, and on Samantha saying that she was
in on 10/5, when the reseptionist had told me that she was not in.
I think one incident like this could be accepted, but when there are
three incidents like this, just to get in contact with a person in your
company, than I think isn’t really acceptable.
Also in the conversation with Samantha on 11/5, I had to keep telling
her to please slow down the speed when she was speaking.
She was speaking very fast (and with an accent), so it wasn’t possiblefor me to understand what she was saying, much of the time.
And even if I repeatedly asked her to please remember that I wasn’t
British, and to therefore please speak a bit slower, she kept ignoring
me and kept on talking very fast.
(When I studied at the University of Sunderland, I took a test that for a
large part was about understanding spoken English. And I got a good
result on the test, so I didn’t need to take English classes to follow
the lectures at the universityl. But when I spoke with Samantha on
11/5, I didn’t have a chance of understanding large parts of what she
was saying. I usually don’t have this problem at all when speaking
with English people).
Complaint 7B: I think a person working with customer in a legal firm,
should try to make an effort to speak in a way that is easy to understand,
especially if one are asked to please speak slower many times by
the customer calling.
Part 3
I am happy for you to deal with my complaint in writing.
I would like the following to sort out my complaint:
I am seeking further advice on how to get the case out of the situation it is
in now (regarding the finance), and this is the most important thing for me,
to get the case progressing in an appropriate way, including with the founding.
I think that I would please like to have another contact in your company if
thats possible, due to the comunication-problems explained in complaint
number 1, 6 and 7.
I also think that the other issues should be dealt with approperatly.
