Recommended Posts

So the topic is locked!

agreed,the final bit was not about cp's.

But someone had a problem with the same person. He was trying to find out information to try to get his money back if possible.

He was also bringing it to the attention of CP GROWERS that this person is still actively conning people! something we should all be aware of.

I think shutting it down in such a manner was a bit heavy handed and could have been done better.

i hope this isn't a sign of things to come..........

ada

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

All I can say as a beginner, is that THIS thread has gotten lots more attention and replies than any of the beginner questions being posted that need some actual help. I specifically wanted to jo

It's nothing to with freedom of speech - it had descended into utter drivel. Most forums would have deleted it way before page 2. Don't wire people $1000 without a safety net. Don't buy blue flyt

My understanding of this is that it's the threatening behaviour that results in bans not the rudeness. And, anyway Alexis doesn't make any attack on particular persons just a general observation of po

It's nothing to with freedom of speech - it had descended into utter drivel. Most forums would have deleted it way before page 2.

Don't wire people $1000 without a safety net. Don't buy blue flytrap seeds off or pay £120 for a red darlingtonia on ebay.

I'm full of helpful consumer advice.

 

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

We call it common sense in yorkshire,if it seems too good to be true,it usually is.

But the point was,      He also made the cp community aware of mr Nimmo's    scam    AGAIN!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@ada the post was locked while we sorted out how much of it was fair to publish publicly.  The post remains locked as the warning is in place by the guy in Canada and I felt the details being published were a step too far.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

@ada forum rules were broken.  We can't have people publishing other people's addresses every time someone makes a complaint.  We grow plants, not breed vigilantes.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the topic was getting out of hand... offering cash for someone to go round to his house and publishing photos !!.

It wasn't even a complaint about plants, if he is going to part with loads of cash for a bunch of ants he should take precautions, such as paying with paypal.  

The plant community have been warned that this person could take their money and not provide goods.  In my opinion that is all that is needed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The house pictured was NOT mr Nimmo's address unless he has moved there, FROM a maisonette further down the road.

I worked on the house pictured as a vacant property.The plants i saw were not in this property.

I have posted this in talk about anything as a discussion,don't reply if you don't like it,but i don't hear Mr Nimmo complaining someone posted his address and photo's.

so if anyone else gets scammed by him don't bother posting it on here,    NO ONE CARES!  

ada

Link to post
Share on other sites

There were people complaining to me Ada.  And it was neither of the parties involved in the 'case'.  There was A postal address given with an offer of money for someone to go there.  That's not on, whether it's in a forum or not in a forum.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ritchards forum?  I thought it was CPUK forum NOT Ritchards forum. Perhaps when you have been a member a bit longer you might realise this.

As you have only been a member for two months I wouldn't make such rash statements !   He is admin.   My vote goes with Ada.

Wind your neck in ...........

21 hours ago, bigphil1984 said:

Well said every time Richard! At the end of the day everyone this is Richards forum and what says go's emoji6.png

Sent from my SM-A300FU using Tapatalk
 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The forum belongs to the CPS now. Richard is the admin and has done exactly the right thing.

The forum is to discuss plants, it is not for a mud slinging match, no matter how much one or two people clearly would like it to be. If a crime has been committed the warning has been posted for all to see that a person who sells plants, has possibly been dishonest  and that is all we need to see. The ins and outs of who was at fault are for the police to deal with, not a kangaroo court here. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not slung any mud,nor held a kangaroo court.

This person has cropped up again and been brought to our attention.

If one thing bothers me,it is people being conned with cp's, i really hate this,yes it has happened to me,so i know how it feels and the people responsible will pay one way or another.  Take that how you want!

I will always name and shame anyone who does this anywhere i can.

If this forum allows me to do so,in a talk about anything topic area.  If not,then the CPS has changed the forum from what it used to be.

And i don;t want any part of it, if it is going that way.

ada

Link to post
Share on other sites

In my view reporting facts is not mud-slinging.  Mud-slinging is unsubstantiated gossip.

There has definately been an attempt to castrate free speech on here.  Whilst im sure the CPS has a hard job knowing where to draw the line, if people are known crooks with a long history of fraud, the CPS responsibility should be to protect hobbyists from those people.  It does no-one any good to allow fraudsters an easy target.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

....but it is unsubstantiated. what evidence do any of us have that the complainant wasn't the conman. nobody even knows him except his pals who joined to stir things up even more. Not one person has shown evidence of any past fraud either it is all hearsay.

The initial complaint is published and clearly visible, so there is a clear warning protecting hobbyists from possible fraud. The arguing and accusing each other is completely unnecessary in warning anyone of anything, it is a police matter from there on..

 

Tell me, what part of the information you can no longer see would have helped in warning a hobbyist,  that the published information doesn't? Not one person said 'Hey he ripped me off too' they were all saying about cases they remembered from years ago or had heard about. Not evidence, hearsay and so mudslinging.

 

i'm not saying none of this happened, just that we can't prove anything one way or the other just by throwing in more accusations and publishing addresses. If fraud has happened it is a police matter,  not for the forum. You can argue about it all you like but the admins decision on how much to publish is and should be, final.

 

If free speech is jumping in making accusations you have no evidence to back up, then yes it needs castrating, preferably with a blunt pair of scissors!

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

From what i saw of the thread there was evidence, both photographic and more than one testimony.

Frankly, telling the bloke to contact the police is unlikely to go anywhere.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You saw one side of a conversation, just titles and first half a dozen words of each email only and photos of a box. How do you know for sure that box was the one that was posted to him from the person he was complaining about? Just because it had an English newspaper, that' proves nothing, it could have come from anywhere or anyone. Why would someone even bother sending an empty box to a wrong address, a library in fact,  in the hope he wouldn't see it?  It would be easier to just say the box went missing. I'm sorry that just doesn't add up or make sense.

The sender of the supposed packet says that the Royal Mail have a signature for the parcel he did send, on the date it was supposed to be delivered some time before the complainant claims to have tracked down a  box. The box he tracked down the sender claims wasn't the one he posted. but that is ignored because it suits people to ignore his side of the story. In my experience, real scammers don't try to defend themselves. What was it about that box that made you so sure only he could have sent it?

The testimonies were two of his mates who joined that afternoon and clearly they knew the complainant well, he isn't even a  plant grower so it is unlikely a CPer would be able to give a reference for the complainant good or otherwise. They were here just to back up their pal and the other stories were hearsay from years ago. If anyone here has  personally been ripped off by this man then please let us know about it,  and please we don't want to hear about a friend of a friend or a story you heard.

If you have proof that any of what was said was accurate, why didn't you post it at the time? You didn't because you don't have proof  and if you don't, you aren't in a position to complain when Admin do the best thing and stop the whole public lynching that was starting to happen.

You may think the police will do nothing, but that is not true, If a complaint is made they have to follow it up and the complainant claims to have made a police report already. Now it is up to the police to deal with his complaint.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not here to take sides, and i have no personal experience of this guy or the complainent.  And now we will never know the truth because you basically blocked any further discussion, leaving us all open to being scammed in future or not as the case maybe.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.