In the interest of decency may I ask MARTIN why the thread re the damaged alloys supplied by AJS been pulled?

Have you put commercial interest before truth and justice?

Pressure from a commercial sponsor?

Common decency requires at response.

I Hope there's not going to be a Roswell style cover up?
Perhaps some Site mediation followed by a statement from the Site Owner would be in the interest of everyone involved

Because under British law there is a legal liability for the forum owner when business reputations are subject of damaging allegations that have no more than ones word against another, which others then made disparaging remarks.

I was subject of a comment of ‘headless chicken’ for pointing out damaging issues for the forum owner.

Sort it in private and save our forum.  A Land Rover owner since 1988

From a 1974 series III to a 12MY XS FL2 with help of a 1995 D1, 1996 D1, 2005 D3, 2007 D3 and a 2009 FL2.

Yes, you were subject to the headless chicken comment. You now appear not only to be second guessing why the thread was pulled, but casting your own, probably unqualified, legal interpretation on the utterances. Not only that, but other posters or indeed this forums welfare is not your responsibility. Like me, you are merely a contributor and a user.

Oh and your own knowledge on Civil Case Law is incomplete. It's been established via several stated cases that a site owner is NOT repsonsible for things said. It's down to the individual. In honesty and trying not to second guess it myself, the legal situation is probably NOT why it was pulled.

Come on guys. Cool it down and let the warring parties sort it out elsewhereand then we get the facts because at the moment we only have two versions of the truth and I am not siding with or criticising anyone. The forum is not a place for disputes to be debated at length is it? Ralph
Zurmatt Silver, Diesel, Automatic, side steps, mud flaps, mats, boot liner, TomTom Start 60 installed, rubbing strips, removable Brink tow bar, after market tinted glass, front styling bar, Rear spoiler, Motorlicious tail pipe trim. Wood Company centre armrest

The products for sale were commercially advertised on this web site.

It is therefore a matter of "protective" interest to the members as I've previously stated. Sweeping it "under the carpet" can not be endorsed as in the "best interests of the forum members or owner". I have now no ability to check the number of replies or viewings on that original thread - but - already 137 interested parties have looked at this new thread.

No damage has been caused to the site owner by comments made on that thread by either party in the dispute.

Physical and third party testimonial evidence is available to prove the veracity of all that I have stated on the original thread.

There is no protection, and you will note that AJS are not a site sponsor at the current time.

However, this forum is not the place to resolve this dispute in the first instance, you have not allowed AJS the opportunity to respond to or address your concerns before you went public with them.

AJS have an excellent reputation, you may look at the feedback on both DISCO3 and RRSPORT to see that, and I have never heard of any similar issues with anything they've supplied during their time as site sponsors.

AJS responded with their explanation of the situation, which you have rejected.

AJS supplied the wheels, but not any delivery or shipping of them. You have been offered a refund of the purchase cost upon return of the items, which seems reasonable given the terms of their supply of said wheels. It is unreasonable for them to cover the responsibility for the wheels once out of their care (either themselves personally or their nominated transport company). Your shipper was responsible for packaging, handling and transporting the items to you, under your instructions.

It has not been, and as far as I can see it cannot be, shown by you that the wheels were damaged before their collection, or whether it was during delivery. AJS state the wheels were to your requirements when they were handed to your nominated shipper, and you state they are damaged upon delivery to you. Therefore, at the current time given both parties' statements, we have wheels in the expected condition being handed over by AJS Tyres and arriving with you damaged.

Any further discussion about this should be taking place between yourself, AJS Tyres and your shipper to identify when and where the damage to your wheels occurred.

I'm sure we will, of course, be interested in the resolution of the issue, but to air each step of the process in public here is not appropriate - particularly as AJS were not given the opportunity to resolve or discuss before you started the original thread.

Martin

Right I'll get me coat and go back where I belong

Very good response Martin, and I for one agree with your view.

I don't know whos right or wrong in the situation, but the forum is no place to sort it out.


 Don't put petrol in a diesel. They don't run well.

Free speech can be argued, but as Martin is the site owner, it's his perogative.

Martin
It is your website. With ownership comes privileges.

Your explanation of this matter however is flawed.

I have not had the chance to date to present factual substantive evidence to proves that the goods supplied were not of the quality as advertised.

In the case of a failure by a retailer to supply the goods as described, English law provides for the full costs of any restitution - it is not limited to the purchase price paid for the goods..

The weight of your resumé clearly demonstrates that your position is not one of impartiality.

Thank You

athelstan wrote:

I have not had the chance to date to present factual substantive evidence to proves that the goods supplied were not of the quality as advertised.

Well why don't you just wrap up until you have then

You need to sort this out with AJS and your shipper privately. Any evidence should be communicated between the three parties involved, and not involve the forum.

Neither the site, or me specifically, are here to mediate in this dispute, which appears to be far from a simple matter to resolve.

I fully understand, however, that no explanation I give or request I make will be fully acceptable to you.

Also I'm not quite sure what you're trying to imply about my resumé?

It seems the issue/stumbling block is not with the shipper, but the third party (or fourth as it may be) that collected the wheels from AJS as that to me is when they became athestans property.

I personally agree with the point raised by Martin that the thread was prematurely started before AJS had been afforded the opportunity to address the situation.

However I do hope that athelstan has a chance to provide his own testimonial after the situation has been resolved either way. As Martin says AJS has glowing testimonials on his other sites, hopefully these are genuine and not sanitized with any negative ones removed.

Post removed by user

Last edited by lypsyl on 19th May 2010 7:43 pm. Edited 1 time in total