Phone one would have paid 5c, then left that forever recurring 1c as a monthly bill. Likely would have been at least 2 years before it got written off.
It never ceases to amaze me how people want to be reasonable with people who are unreasonable. When will people learn that squatters are not reasonable and they have no reason to be.
The cabin story. Ok, OP was left the cabin by his grandparents. OP goes to cabin and finds people living there. OP's lawyer says couple had gotten ahold of OP's personal info and identity. Then couple forged documents of sale. Now, OP claims that the sale was 'overturned'. There was no sale. I'd believe this story, but find it too coincidental that some couple just managed to find an empty cabin, know who owned it, got the owners personal info, and setup such an elaborate scheme. So not only were this couple part of a drug scheme, but also identity theft and real estate fraud. I'm wondering who also was involved that was able to provide all of OP's identity info.
Bob and the return. While Bob might have a computer, or tablet or smartphone, does not mean that Bob has a printer. I know people who don't own printers but have some sort of device.
Does not want to have technology, yet bought online, had it delivered, but does not want to be doing an online return, which requires you to either write out a waybill, including a tracking number, or print it, and take it down to the post office to send it. But does not want to do that, so will not get a refund, will not be able to dispute with the CC company, because they will do a refund, but will, once the company says the goods were ordered, packed correctly, sent correctly, arrived correctly but customer does not want to have the goods, but refuses to return them. CC company will then reverse the reversal, and if customer then is calling in they will require proof he has returned the goods before they will do anything. Now he will print the form, but find out that the window to return is long gone, there is no warranty, and him sending the stuff back will not result in a credit.
21 mins, what an entitled OP. Your company created a system that doesn't "fit" for pensioners and the disabled. There is no legal requirement for people to have any technology. You / your company has a policy that's discriminatory.
Yet they used a computer, either desktop, laptop or phone, to order online. Even the disabled have embraced computer technology, and online, and they can easily arrange for a printed return label, even if they are blind. If the ahole is that against technology why did they order online, which again involves intimate use of that computer in all steps, and return involved again computers, all ahole had to do was take the parcel to the post office (surely in the USA there is one ahole can get to with ease, not like me where PO is basically bankrupt, and letters take months to move) with his phone, likely how he ordered, and the post office will print the return label for him. But nope, ahole gotta be an ahole, and toss his toys that he has to actually get off his ass, man up to him making a mistake, and actually do something to correct it, and not have everybody wipe his butt, put salve on the burn, and kiss him that the widdle boy got a boo boo.
I think you were talking to my bil, only joking. He is a technophobe. He has a mobile phone but only puts it on when he visits his daughters and their families. Quite a few miles away. He only recently got WiFi so he could get tv online. He is almost 81 but my Mum has WiFi , an iPad and plays games and reads books with the kindle app. She is 90.
Phone one would have paid 5c, then left that forever recurring 1c as a monthly bill. Likely would have been at least 2 years before it got written off.
When Jake said he needed help it would have been nice if they mentioned a place he could go to .
Hi everyone
It never ceases to amaze me how people want to be reasonable with people who are unreasonable. When will people learn that squatters are not reasonable and they have no reason to be.
I knew the cabin squatters were cooking and/or using meth nearly immediately because a place like that seems perfect for pulling a Walter White
The cabin story. Ok, OP was left the cabin by his grandparents. OP goes to cabin and finds people living there. OP's lawyer says couple had gotten ahold of OP's personal info and identity. Then couple forged documents of sale. Now, OP claims that the sale was 'overturned'. There was no sale. I'd believe this story, but find it too coincidental that some couple just managed to find an empty cabin, know who owned it, got the owners personal info, and setup such an elaborate scheme. So not only were this couple part of a drug scheme, but also identity theft and real estate fraud.
I'm wondering who also was involved that was able to provide all of OP's identity info.
The Readers, can we be friends
Love make payments on .4 cents
Bob and the return. While Bob might have a computer, or tablet or smartphone, does not mean that Bob has a printer. I know people who don't own printers but have some sort of device.
📖👓📗📙🧙♂
Does not want to have technology, yet bought online, had it delivered, but does not want to be doing an online return, which requires you to either write out a waybill, including a tracking number, or print it, and take it down to the post office to send it. But does not want to do that, so will not get a refund, will not be able to dispute with the CC company, because they will do a refund, but will, once the company says the goods were ordered, packed correctly, sent correctly, arrived correctly but customer does not want to have the goods, but refuses to return them. CC company will then reverse the reversal, and if customer then is calling in they will require proof he has returned the goods before they will do anything. Now he will print the form, but find out that the window to return is long gone, there is no warranty, and him sending the stuff back will not result in a credit.
That last story was barely coherent. What the hell was going on?
Story about shipping label I think both were aholes in that story.
21 mins, what an entitled OP. Your company created a system that doesn't "fit" for pensioners and the disabled. There is no legal requirement for people to have any technology. You / your company has a policy that's discriminatory.
Yet they used a computer, either desktop, laptop or phone, to order online. Even the disabled have embraced computer technology, and online, and they can easily arrange for a printed return label, even if they are blind. If the ahole is that against technology why did they order online, which again involves intimate use of that computer in all steps, and return involved again computers, all ahole had to do was take the parcel to the post office (surely in the USA there is one ahole can get to with ease, not like me where PO is basically bankrupt, and letters take months to move) with his phone, likely how he ordered, and the post office will print the return label for him. But nope, ahole gotta be an ahole, and toss his toys that he has to actually get off his ass, man up to him making a mistake, and actually do something to correct it, and not have everybody wipe his butt, put salve on the burn, and kiss him that the widdle boy got a boo boo.
I'm happy I wasn't the only one annoyed by that one.
I think you were talking to my bil, only joking. He is a technophobe. He has a mobile phone but only puts it on when he visits his daughters and their families. Quite a few miles away. He only recently got WiFi so he could get tv online. He is almost 81 but my Mum has WiFi , an iPad and plays games and reads books with the kindle app. She is 90.
Sigh... Another Reupload...