Larrydsimon
Recruit
- Messages
- 3
To my mind the seller has expressly extended the money back guarantee to the buyer over the 60 day period and must refund the purchase. In any event, it would probably be good business practice.
GUILTY - Case# 2011-015 | traderforliving vs www.fantasydreamteam.com/ea.html
- Thread starter traderforliving
- Start date
It is without doubt Nino is asking whether the refund still applies for the discounted price which Mr Swaby has agreed to offer him.
There would be no need for Nino to ask if the refund still applies if it is for the non-discounted price.
Clearly Mr Swaby is a deceitful person, totally lacking in integrity. I bet Swaby knows Nino is referring to the discounted price.
If Mr Swaby does not even have the basic intelligence to know this, I wonder how he can have the intelligence to program a good EA.
But then again, it seems Swaby's EA is not giving good results, which is not surprising since the EA is the work of someone lacking in basic intelligence.
Mr Swaby is corrupting himself and his own mind by still persisting he did not know that Nino was referring to the discounted price.
Come on, repent and save yourself from further corruption.
There would be no need for Nino to ask if the refund still applies if it is for the non-discounted price.
Clearly Mr Swaby is a deceitful person, totally lacking in integrity. I bet Swaby knows Nino is referring to the discounted price.
If Mr Swaby does not even have the basic intelligence to know this, I wonder how he can have the intelligence to program a good EA.
But then again, it seems Swaby's EA is not giving good results, which is not surprising since the EA is the work of someone lacking in basic intelligence.
Mr Swaby is corrupting himself and his own mind by still persisting he did not know that Nino was referring to the discounted price.
Come on, repent and save yourself from further corruption.
GratefulAl
Recruit
- Messages
- 2
Richard, I read all of your arguments in the previous case, and wondered if I had voted (guilty) correctly. Yet in your arguments in this case, you have clearly demonstrated your unwillingness to protect your customers who trust you. Under "the law of the reasonable man" your communications would certainly be interpreted as deceptive. You are obviously not deceiving this man by inserting misleading information, but you are clearly deceiving him by withholding critical information that you know will help you to keep his money. You have inserted a "trailing stop" into your contract so he runs out of space to move.
Your fierce arguments to justify yourself have been sad to watch. Refund the man instead of consuming yourself in a web of deception.
Your fierce arguments to justify yourself have been sad to watch. Refund the man instead of consuming yourself in a web of deception.
Swaby is twisting facts
I told everybody that Richard is thinking differently than the rest of mankind.
He tried to steal my money by ignoring my e-mails.
He did not apologize for his deceit and intentional fraud, but he still thinks he had all rights to refuse the refund to me.
Can anybody believe how twisted Swaby is thinking ?
Nino requested the refund within the 60-days trial period, Swaby stalled and now claims that the 60 days are over.
Oh, really, Richard ?
I was entitled to a refund !!!!!
How come ?
And why did you torture me more than 4 weeks ?
Ignoring my e-mails,
ignoring the thread in the Scam-alerts folder,
ignoring the discussion thread in FPA,
ignoring the review about you on FPA ?
Ok, Richard.
So you knew that I was entitled to a refund but refused to send me the money.
What is that called in your thinking ?
Please explain, Richard.
And although you admit that you simply tried to steal my money, you still think of having been "bullied" by FPA Court Case to send me my money.
How does that fit into your twisted ethics, Richard ?
People have witnessed how you defended your fraudulent activities and justified it with your "terms and conditions" which nullified the 100% money-back-guarantee.
You played the dirty trick ( deception ) to me although I "was entitled to a refund".
Now you are playing it to Nino.
You have no clue about ethics, about how to treat customers, about honesty.
You think of your customers: These thieves try to get my EA for free.
They try to get a refund and thus get a free lunch.
But I will not tolerate it.
I will point them to my terms although I mislead them to believe that they will get a refund.
Fact is:
You placed a refund-guarantee on your website which you never intended to honour.
It was only there to deceive potential buyers into thinking they would have no risk.
Fact is:
Your EA wasn´t profitable when I tested it.
It wasn´t profitable when Nino and others tested it (the updated versions which you did not send to me because I had dared to request a refund).
Fact is:
You allegedly have 38 customers who sent you their trade-statements which you published on your website = 19.000 Dollars .
You claim that you make 2%daily with your manual method every day
and your EA (what version exactly ?) makes 2% daily too (or not ?).
If your claims were true, you must be a multi-millionnaire who got another 19.000 Dollars during the last few weeks, but you fight like a lion to refuse refunds for 4 traders ( = 2000 Dollars refunds ) although
they all have the right according to your refund guarantee to get the refund.
This all is telling me something:
Beware of doing business with Richard Swaby.
And another important thing, Richard:
Protect your EA because then you don´t have to think so bad about your customers and accuse them of trying to get a free lunch.
Swaby said:
I told everybody that Richard is thinking differently than the rest of mankind.
He tried to steal my money by ignoring my e-mails.
He did not apologize for his deceit and intentional fraud, but he still thinks he had all rights to refuse the refund to me.
Swaby said:
Can anybody believe how twisted Swaby is thinking ?
Nino requested the refund within the 60-days trial period, Swaby stalled and now claims that the 60 days are over.
Swaby said:
Oh, really, Richard ?
I was entitled to a refund !!!!!
How come ?
And why did you torture me more than 4 weeks ?
Ignoring my e-mails,
ignoring the thread in the Scam-alerts folder,
ignoring the discussion thread in FPA,
ignoring the review about you on FPA ?
Swaby said:
Ok, Richard.
So you knew that I was entitled to a refund but refused to send me the money.
What is that called in your thinking ?
Please explain, Richard.
And although you admit that you simply tried to steal my money, you still think of having been "bullied" by FPA Court Case to send me my money.
How does that fit into your twisted ethics, Richard ?
People have witnessed how you defended your fraudulent activities and justified it with your "terms and conditions" which nullified the 100% money-back-guarantee.
You played the dirty trick ( deception ) to me although I "was entitled to a refund".
Now you are playing it to Nino.
You have no clue about ethics, about how to treat customers, about honesty.
You think of your customers: These thieves try to get my EA for free.
They try to get a refund and thus get a free lunch.
But I will not tolerate it.
I will point them to my terms although I mislead them to believe that they will get a refund.
Fact is:
You placed a refund-guarantee on your website which you never intended to honour.
It was only there to deceive potential buyers into thinking they would have no risk.
Fact is:
Your EA wasn´t profitable when I tested it.
It wasn´t profitable when Nino and others tested it (the updated versions which you did not send to me because I had dared to request a refund).
Fact is:
You allegedly have 38 customers who sent you their trade-statements which you published on your website = 19.000 Dollars .
You claim that you make 2%daily with your manual method every day
and your EA (what version exactly ?) makes 2% daily too (or not ?).
If your claims were true, you must be a multi-millionnaire who got another 19.000 Dollars during the last few weeks, but you fight like a lion to refuse refunds for 4 traders ( = 2000 Dollars refunds ) although
they all have the right according to your refund guarantee to get the refund.
This all is telling me something:
Beware of doing business with Richard Swaby.
And another important thing, Richard:
Protect your EA because then you don´t have to think so bad about your customers and accuse them of trying to get a free lunch.
comendador
Recruit
- Messages
- 2
poor Richard ....
I feel sorry for your Richard.
One day (if not already....) you will have children. Your children will read what you have been doing with people.
This threads will be also occasionally read by your close people.Family and friends.
Believe. If they are normal people, and I think they are, the will feel ashamed about you. They will not tell you. They will tell you " yeah Richard... you were right does not it?"
But inside they will know what EXACTLY you were doing.
The worst thing is that you LOOKS like believing what you are telling .This is even dangerous. Dangerous for you .Dangerous for us.
With some distance It remembers me the Gadaffi ´s speach yesterday. A victim . A hero..You are also the victim of the ignorance and laziness of your clients .Does not it ?
I´m sorry for you man. You are choosing the dark side.
It´s also a pity but... you have to protect ourselves from people like you.
I feel sorry for your Richard.
One day (if not already....) you will have children. Your children will read what you have been doing with people.
This threads will be also occasionally read by your close people.Family and friends.
Believe. If they are normal people, and I think they are, the will feel ashamed about you. They will not tell you. They will tell you " yeah Richard... you were right does not it?"
But inside they will know what EXACTLY you were doing.
The worst thing is that you LOOKS like believing what you are telling .This is even dangerous. Dangerous for you .Dangerous for us.
With some distance It remembers me the Gadaffi ´s speach yesterday. A victim . A hero..You are also the victim of the ignorance and laziness of your clients .Does not it ?
I´m sorry for you man. You are choosing the dark side.
It´s also a pity but... you have to protect ourselves from people like you.
Geert Anthonis
Private, 1st Class
- Messages
- 33
Same guy, same problem! Need we say more?
Richard really does not seem to understand a few simple facts. His fixation on his T&Cs as an excuse not to pay a refund shows he does not understand the true principle of a 60 days 100% satisfaction money back guarantee. I have bought what I thought were dude products. One later turned out to be right but by then I had moved on. Still my experience is that if its owner stands by his word and honours his X days 100% satisfaction money back guarantee, he is trustworthy. And you will be hard pressed to find any negative comments about him.
Richard clearly misled Nino. It was obvious the question was asked as related to the subject at hand. If his system is as good as he claims he would be making a fortune using it himself them why as Galina points out make so much waves and create so much bad publicity by refusing to honour an explicitly given guarantee. His fixation on his T&Cs as an excuse not to pay a refund shows he does not understand the principle of a
Richard could prove all these people complaining about his product are in fact wrong asking for a refund by letting someone independently test his product and publish the results. As mentioned in the previous case against him the examples on his website are doctored.
Once again Richard to more you explain the more guilty you look. Admit you mistakes.
Guilty!!!
Richard really does not seem to understand a few simple facts. His fixation on his T&Cs as an excuse not to pay a refund shows he does not understand the true principle of a 60 days 100% satisfaction money back guarantee. I have bought what I thought were dude products. One later turned out to be right but by then I had moved on. Still my experience is that if its owner stands by his word and honours his X days 100% satisfaction money back guarantee, he is trustworthy. And you will be hard pressed to find any negative comments about him.
Richard clearly misled Nino. It was obvious the question was asked as related to the subject at hand. If his system is as good as he claims he would be making a fortune using it himself them why as Galina points out make so much waves and create so much bad publicity by refusing to honour an explicitly given guarantee. His fixation on his T&Cs as an excuse not to pay a refund shows he does not understand the principle of a
Richard could prove all these people complaining about his product are in fact wrong asking for a refund by letting someone independently test his product and publish the results. As mentioned in the previous case against him the examples on his website are doctored.
Once again Richard to more you explain the more guilty you look. Admit you mistakes.
Guilty!!!
ArielKorber
Private, 1st Class
- Messages
- 61
To me its very simple.
Forget all the legal stuff: Why would you want to take money from someone who is not benefiting from your product?
If I had an EA to sell and someone just couldn't make it work for them, I would feel very bad for charging them $400.
Irrespective of the T&C, its just normal human ethics. If you have not provided value for the customer, why do you feel you are entitled to their money?
Richard, stop hiding behind the T&C: comeout in the light of day and behave like a human being should.
In the very minimum admit there was potential for misunderstanding in the email exchange. Show how big you are give the benefit of doubt.
Otherwise we will all conclude that you make money by selling a dud EA for large sums and make it difficult to get refunds when the truth is revealed.
At least if you provide a refund we might think you make your money though trading, but currently this seems very unlikely.
Forget all the legal stuff: Why would you want to take money from someone who is not benefiting from your product?
If I had an EA to sell and someone just couldn't make it work for them, I would feel very bad for charging them $400.
Irrespective of the T&C, its just normal human ethics. If you have not provided value for the customer, why do you feel you are entitled to their money?
Richard, stop hiding behind the T&C: comeout in the light of day and behave like a human being should.
In the very minimum admit there was potential for misunderstanding in the email exchange. Show how big you are give the benefit of doubt.
Otherwise we will all conclude that you make money by selling a dud EA for large sums and make it difficult to get refunds when the truth is revealed.
At least if you provide a refund we might think you make your money though trading, but currently this seems very unlikely.
The Clincher
After carefully considering the facts, I have voted.
The crucial piece of evidence can be found in the fact that Richard answered Nino's question about the guarantee still being available with the 20% Discount, by answering "yes" and then providing the link to the discounted product, which supposedly does NOT attract such a refund.
This may have been an accidental oversight, but if this is the case, then Richard should still honor his statement that led to Nini's purchase.
Let me say that had I purchased a product from any vendor under identical circumstances, I too would be expecting a refund.
Step one is clear: Richard should stop offering discounts - that would remove confusion.
Step two would be to remember that the best and cheapest advertising is a satisfied client.
After carefully considering the facts, I have voted.
The crucial piece of evidence can be found in the fact that Richard answered Nino's question about the guarantee still being available with the 20% Discount, by answering "yes" and then providing the link to the discounted product, which supposedly does NOT attract such a refund.
This may have been an accidental oversight, but if this is the case, then Richard should still honor his statement that led to Nini's purchase.
Let me say that had I purchased a product from any vendor under identical circumstances, I too would be expecting a refund.
Step one is clear: Richard should stop offering discounts - that would remove confusion.
Step two would be to remember that the best and cheapest advertising is a satisfied client.
