selectortone
Still waking up not dead in the morning
Just having a laugh. A scarce commodity in these here parts.
Last edited:
Warning - aware of scammers!
- Thread starter misterfish
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
That's always a good thing
That is why insurance premiums just keep rising and the scumbags keep being scumbags. Shame the guy was not a farmer, he could have pointed a shotgun at them and called the police, but then I suppose they would have claimed compensation for stress and he would have got charged as the system now provides scumbags with human rights and the police like them as it keeps them employed. If you watch that program about the police in Sheffield it is really an eye opener, the police know they have lost and are powerless in so many situations that they just look like they play the game, since when does a copper become a social worker, whilst doing this role a real scumbag is getting away.
Blackswanwood
Still Learning
I have to do the honourable thing and admit having read your explanation I see your point and agree you are actually correct.The judge was explaining what he concluded from the fact. If there were no inference he must not, by definition, have concluded anything since infer means to conclude from facts. I would find it worrying if the judge did not reach his conclusions based on the facts presented in evidence.
Really? Then you would be wrong.
I don't have access to the OED but my copy of The Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English" published by the Oxford University Press defines infer as:
The Cambridge online dictionary defines infer as:
Collins says:
Indeed, Collins goes further in saying:
In all of these it is clear that someone infers something from the facts. The facts do not infer something, they may imply something, and someone might infer (conclude) something based on the facts.
The judge said " the fact ... inferred it was they who ordered the items". Did the fact "reach an opinion" or "form an opinion" or "decide that it is true"? Clearly not: the judge did that.
There are loads of online sources to confirm this, such as
Imply vs. Infer
How to Use Imply vs. infer Correctly – Grammarist
Imply or infer ?
Let's try another example: The judge's incorrect use of "infer" implies that he lacks a good grasp of English. The responses to my comment about that causes me to infer that the judge is not the only one.
I have to do the honourable thing and admit having read your explanation I see your point and agree you are actually correct.
Good. Nice to converse with a sensible person.Now all I have to do is convince the judge.
Well this was unusual, had a Hermes driver knock on the door today, asking to collect a parcel. He was definitely working for Hermes as he had a stack of their collection cards and one of their phone/computer/scanner things which had my name and address on it.
I didn't have a parcel to collect. What makes it more unusual? This is the second time this has happened in the last 2 weeks or so.
I didn't have a parcel to collect. What makes it more unusual? This is the second time this has happened in the last 2 weeks or so.
paulrbarnard
Established Member
The judge was explaining what he concluded from the fact. If there were no inference he must not, by definition, have concluded anything since infer means to conclude from facts. I would find it worrying if the judge did not reach his conclusions based on the facts presented in evidence.
Really? Then you would be wrong.
I don't have access to the OED but my copy of The Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English" published by the Oxford University Press defines infer as:
The Cambridge online dictionary defines infer as:
Collins says:
Indeed, Collins goes further in saying:
In all of these it is clear that someone infers something from the facts. The facts do not infer something, they may imply something, and someone might infer (conclude) something based on the facts.
The judge said " the fact ... inferred it was they who ordered the items". Did the fact "reach an opinion" or "form an opinion" or "decide that it is true"? Clearly not: the judge did that.
There are loads of online sources to confirm this, such as
Imply vs. Infer
How to Use Imply vs. infer Correctly – Grammarist
Imply or infer ?
Let's try another example: The judge's incorrect use of "infer" implies that he lacks a good grasp of English. The responses to my comment about that causes me to infer that the judge is not the only one.
The knife cuts both ways…
misterfish
Established Member
Well, interesting but somewhat inaccurate in our case...
We've just had a second visit from our local police officer and things have developed!
He took the photo and the rest of the info and went to the DPD depot. They confirmed that the initial delivery of the package was legitimate and made by DPD (as we thought), but the second 'scam DPD' person was not known to them at all and the police of Sussex, Surrey and Hampshire now have his picture on their wanted list that is updated daily so if he is seen or known by any police officer in the 3 counties he will be 'invited to help them with their enquiries'! Also DPD are going to now sort out the return of the delivery and sort it out with Vodaphone!
I can't fault the actions of the police at all and can only praise the actions our local officers have taken. In fact all our dealings with the police have be excellent (apart from the miserable git that pulled me over for speeding 30 years ago!
As for feeling threatened, we don't particularly - more annoyed with the scumbags who we hope will get their due come uppance! Ttis attempt at scamming has failed but they have actually lost nothing of significance and the likelihood of returning here is minimal as they won't want to be seen here again and recognised. They will no doubt have others that also fail - in essence they have only lost the possibility of about £1,700 worth of kit that they would no doubt have sold for well below this value.
In a previous house when we lived in the Mendips we had a burglary taking place that was discovered by my wife and younger son when they returned from shopping. They quickly assessed the situation and my wife locked herself in the car wile my son had a look at the van they had parked in our yard. It so happened that the two scumbags had left the keys in the ignition and my son removed these and hid neaarby with a rock in hand ready to defend himself and my wife from the thugs. In this case they ran out and got into the van and then searched for the keys. Meanwhile my wife called 999 and was told to stay locked in the car and that help was on the way. When the thugs finally realised what was happening one of them threatened my wife while she was still locked in the car who shrugged and said she'd called the police at which point they made their biggest mistake and threatened
her with a claw hammer but rapidly ran off when they realised that they had no easy way to escape apart from running as far and fast as they could. The police arrived ina few minutes mob handed in a couple of police cars - one apologised as he was still wearing his running kit and they had dropped everything and driven as fast as they could without delay.
Suffice it to say that with the van, loaded with stuff they had removed from our house and copious amounts of fingerprints they were rapidly apprehended and my wife had the pleasure of attending an identity parade. The outcome was that they both served time at her Majesty's pleasure with the judge taking a really dim view of the 'gent' threatening her with a hammer and he was incarcerated for 4 years!
We believe we live in and should be members of a decent and safe society and that we should play our part as and when necessary and possible to try to keep it that way. If as was suggested we just handed over the package this would just give the scubags the green light to to carry on in their appaling ways and society would tend towards lawlessness and anarchy.
I was wondering whether to post the photo of the fake DPD man here so that others (that are woodworkers) throughout the country and around the world would be aware. (Acknowledgements to the late great Nicholas Parsons and 'Just a Minute' for the phraseology) Anyone got any thoughts on the matter.
The thing I find most annoying about this is Vodafone's reaction (or should I say total ignoring of the matter). From my initial phone call to them where I could get no understanding or reaction from their so called customer service person that this was a crime and subsequently no response to my email to them on the subject. I certainly wouldn't touch that company with a barge pole now. Even just a 'thank you' from them would be appreciated.
So now we hope that the next we hear is an arrest has been made and that I have to make a formal statement.
Jeff
Last edited:
woodieallen
Established Member
Well done, Jeff. But I'm not surprised at the attitude of Vodafone customer service. It's why I left them years ago. Hopeless.
D_W is right. Don't post the photo anywhere. They will sue you for defamation of character and it will cost you dearly. HTH.
Edit: This is true, it's a crazy world!
Edit: This is true, it's a crazy world!
misterfish
Established Member
Thanks everyone.
Jeff
Jeff
sometimewoodworker
Established Member
Either, as implied above a troll, or a distinct lack of educationShouldn't that be: "The judge's incorrect use of "infer" infers that he lacks a good grasp of English?
MARK.B.
Established Member
If you want to advertise these scum, create a fake Facebook page or similar and plaster it all over the net
My Dad had a thing where his Amazon got hacked, the first thing that happened was a package of Kitchen rolls arrived, he hadn't ordered any but didn't really think much about it.
I think this was a test purchase to see if the victim noticed or not. Later it turned out they had bought a bunch of gift cards and vouchers. Amazon sorted it out quickly as it was obviously a hack.
I had the most blatant one so far the other day.
A guy rings me about my "accident" which does not exist of course. I said there was no accident, the guy was sort of suggesting that maybe there could have been an accident and it wasn't my fault etc.
I said that surely that is fraud, the first guy couldn't understand what I was on about and had no concept of fraud or why it would be a problem.
I was curious as to how it worked, he put on his supervisor who said that I could get £6000,
He explained a bit how they do all the paperwork etc and all I would need to do was sign it.
I said to this guy it was fraud and he openly agreed with me and suggested that it was an easy way to make a few grand.
I said I wouldn't do it of course. But I wonder how many have!!
Bonkers.
Ollie
I think this was a test purchase to see if the victim noticed or not. Later it turned out they had bought a bunch of gift cards and vouchers. Amazon sorted it out quickly as it was obviously a hack.
I had the most blatant one so far the other day.
A guy rings me about my "accident" which does not exist of course. I said there was no accident, the guy was sort of suggesting that maybe there could have been an accident and it wasn't my fault etc.
I said that surely that is fraud, the first guy couldn't understand what I was on about and had no concept of fraud or why it would be a problem.
I was curious as to how it worked, he put on his supervisor who said that I could get £6000,
He explained a bit how they do all the paperwork etc and all I would need to do was sign it.
I said to this guy it was fraud and he openly agreed with me and suggested that it was an easy way to make a few grand.
I said I wouldn't do it of course. But I wonder how many have!!
Bonkers.
Ollie
Last edited:
NikNak
Established Member
We're getting a lot of 'scam' calls just lately about our loft insulation not being correctly installed and that it will cause damp and fungus and that they are happy to come and do a survey to sort it all out. I leave a long pause.... then say "we dont have a loft, we live in a flat..." another long pause (i can hear the caller thinking....) then.... the phone goes dead.... 
Don't do that - get them to come and do the survey.We're getting a lot of 'scam' calls just lately about our loft insulation not being correctly installed and that it will cause damp and fungus and that they are happy to come and do a survey to sort it all out. I leave a long pause.... then say "we dont have a loft, we live in a flat..." another long pause (i can hear the caller thinking....) then.... the phone goes dead....
Read a story once of a guy being plagued by a guttering company, who after a few "not interesteds" said sure, come and measure up and quote. Which they duly did. To his thatched house.
"Are you an silly person?" the guy asked him.
"Apparently", he replied.
Not if he wanted to keep his certificate. A scam like that does not justify threatening the use of deadly force.
No - the law provides people with rights, and if the right not to be threatened with death by someone who isn't even a victim of a crime is one then that's probably not a bad thing.
All law abidding people need the right to defend and protect, put your head above the parapet and become an antisocial scumbag then you have to take the consequences, if that entails someone putting you in hospital then maybe lesson learnt. We have become to soft with criminals, our prisons need to be more like the Bangkok prisons where if you survive you will not want to return.
