 Poster: A snowHead
|
I was on holiday when Simon posted his reply to my 'whinge' and this is the first opportunity I've had to respond. This thread has moved on somewhat since the 24th September so I apologise for having to drag it back.
| Simon Cross wrote: |
.......However I can assure you that we were not aware of the sale of the hotel at the time your holiday was booked in April and we most certainly *did* have a written agreement from our supplier to sell it. We have a good relationship with the supplier and it came as a big surprise to us that the situation changed when it did, and to the extent it did. As other snowHeads have pointed out, these kinds of changes have a significant impact on our business, and we were particularly let down with this situation. Securing hotel accommodation so well located in Meribel is tough, and we continue to seek suitable product at a price deemed relevant to the UK market............
|
I'm not surprised that Crystal had a written contract with the hotel. It would be pretty poor to take a booking and deposits from a customer if this was not the case. Would I be wrong in presuming the agreement included financial penalties if either side broke the agreement?
When Crystal advised that they could not fufill our booking, five months after taking our deposits, because the 'owners had sold the hotel', we were not offered any financial compensation by Crystal since their Terms and Conditions provide no such compensation in these circumstances, and only a maximum of £40 if it had happened in the week before our departure!
Who got all the compensation money?
| Simon Cross wrote: |
With regard to the alternatives offered to you, I think we have to openly concede that what was offered clearly did not meet your requirements. At the same time our options were somewhat limited due to the party size. We did have accommodation available in Meribel, but not enough availability at a similar grade to the Savoy. The bed and breakfast option was offered due to the location and the alternative hotel offered in Les Arcs was of a higher rating and an upgraded board basis. Having said that I accept we could have tried much harder to fully understand your requirements, which may well have ultimately retained your business. We will have to learn this lesson well for next time.
I do hope that I have been able to clarify our position, and provide a satisfactory response to your specific situation.
|
I would have thought employees of a specialist ski holiday company would realise that people choose a particular resort for specific reasons and it is not just because it has snow. Not only was B&B in Courchevel or higher-rated hotel in Les Arc not suitable as a substitute they were not even in our top five options of Meribel, St Anton, Ischgl, Val d'Isere or Saalbach (those who enjoy apres-ski will see a pattern).
At the time of the cancellation, I found an alternative hotel in Meribel, just 100m away from our original choice, and listed in the Crystal brochure which had availability. This hotel has an extra star rating and obviously cost more. It wasn't offered to us in any way other than 'pay the full price or nothing'. Not split the difference. Not even at a small discount for all the trouble we (customers spending £12,000+ with Crystal for many years) had been caused.
I admire Simon for having the b**ls to comment in this public domain on the thread that I started, and I wish him well in trying to improve Crystals' service. If he succeeds our group is unlikely to notice because the general feeling is Crystal? - Never again!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Mr Marmot, I'm afraid he bogged off when we suggested he treat his staff like human beings. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
My £40 looks pretty safe at this point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Mr Technique wrote: |
| My £40 looks pretty safe at this point. |
You lot are too quick...
*thinking*...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
I would have thought employees of a specialist ski holiday company would realise that people choose a particular resort for specific reasons and it is not just because it has snow. Not only was B&B in Courchevel or higher-rated hotel in Les Arc not suitable as a substitute they were not even in our top five options of Meribel, St Anton, Ischgl, Val d'Isere or Saalbach (those who enjoy apres-ski will see a pattern).
At the time of the cancellation, I found an alternative hotel in Meribel, just 100m away from our original choice, and listed in the Crystal brochure which had availability. This hotel has an extra star rating and obviously cost more. It wasn't offered to us in any way other than 'pay the full price or nothing'. Not split the difference. Not even at a small discount for all the trouble we (customers spending £12,000+ with Crystal for many years) had been caused.
|
I was not aware that you had volunteered different options to the team here.
However as I suggested earlier in the thread the feedback from you and others here has led to us changing our internal process so that if and when this type of difficult situation happens in the future we will ensure that the options proposed do better meet customers' requirements. We will do this by having our team contact the customer affected and better understanding what is required from the holiday before offering up alternatives.
Furthermore, where the alternatives offered may be more expensive from a customers' point of view, we will do what we can commercially to look for a "win-win". I of course appreciate that £12,000 is a great deal of money to spend on a holiday however sometimes the prices we offer do not give an awful lot of room for maneuver - at the end of the day great value is why people choose to ski with us, and therefore we cut out as much "fat" as we can on the "standard" prices, especially on group bookings.
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
I admire Simon for having the b**ls to comment in this public domain on the thread that I started, and I wish him well in trying to improve Crystals' service. If he succeeds our group is unlikely to notice because the general feeling is Crystal? - Never again! |
I'm genuinely sorry to hear that Mr Marmot. I can only hope that you now feel we are taking your (and other people's) comments on board and doing our best to improve our product and service. Over time I'm going to make it my goal to try to turn around your "never again" comment.
Sincerely,
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Simon I have to admit that I have no way of knowing if our Travel Agent passed on all our suggested solutions to the problem to Crystal. We only have their word that they did and that Crystal's reply was totally negative.
I like your suggestion that Crystal might in future contact the person booking the holiday directly in circumstances such as ours. It might help you to have a specialist person/team with special negotiating powers handling this.
Whilst I notice that you didn't answer my query about what happened to any compensation from the hotel to Crystal for breaking the contract/agreement, I am still impressed with most of your answers and that you have been prepared to give them on a public forum.
I will ensure that the rest of our group are aware that the MD of Crystal Ski has taken a personal interest in our complaint and has suggested steps to avoid a similar problem affecting others in the future. I'm not sure that it will pacify them but it should improve on their current thinking that Crystal doesn't give a damn!
I feel I've made my points about the problem we suffered and you have taken your chance to reply. I will not be making any further comments on this subject because I feel it has run its course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
the MD of Crystal Ski has taken a personal interest in our complaint
|
Where did he say that? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lizzard, which bit - MD or the personal interest? He says in his signture he is the MD and his replies cleary show a pesonal interest in the complaint
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
| .....we were not offered any financial compensation by Crystal since their Terms and Conditions provide no such compensation in these circumstances..... |
So as you agreed to the T&C when you booked, you don't appear to have any gorunds for complaint - unless you are claiming an unfair condition of contract?
| Quote: |
| ... Who got all the compensation money?........ |
How is that your business?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aha, I see they have culled half the staff and booted Matthew Prior upstairs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
FWIW, I think it's refreshing that Simon Cross has had the front to come here and debate/respond with/to those that seem to have a legitimate cause for complaint. It must also be extremely frustrating trying to please all people all the time - one can only hope that Simon is able to change some of the culture at Crystal to ensure that dissatisfaction is kept to a minimum.
For the record, I've used Crystal twice over 20 or so weeks of skiing. Both times the holiday delivered "exactly what it said on the tin". There were a few minor issues, and a few unexpected bonuses, which is probably par for the course for most people's experiences. If Crystal have the right holiday at the right price, I'd certainly book with them again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
I do not come on here very often, but just saw this topic whilst looking for ideas for booking a holiday for next winter.
Anyway, I just went on the 'Singlesport' web site as I thought they might be the answer for one person looking for a holiday and guess what. I read through all there stuff, nowhere did it say anything about an extra charge for being single, well you would think it would not as it aims at the single market. Thought oh great I will book a trip with them, then guess what. Right at the end in the cost section they charge a supplement for being a single. Figure that!! Now if that was up front at the start you could understand, but to say they are aiming at singles and then right at the end just before you book you find a £200 plus supplement for being single. Well I do not think that is very fair. So I shall not be using them. Has anyone else had a similar experience when trying to find a holiday just for one person?
Thought other singles looking for a holiday would like to know about this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi richardK,
Just to point out 1st that I have no connection with Singlesport and have never even heard of them until you posted. But, in the sprit of fairness and to counteract a possible Pandora being thrown I took a look at their website.
You say
| richardK wrote: |
| Now if that was up front at the start you could understand, but to say they are aiming at singles and then right at the end just before you book you find a £200 plus supplement for being single. Well I do not think that is very fair. So I shall not be using them. |
Hmmmm when I looked at the website it said this - you should read stuff "before" you start the booking process.
| Singlesport wrote: |
Do we have to share rooms?
The holiday price is for shared rooms and i am happy to find someone for you to share with. If you prefer a single room we try to provied them for a reasonable supplement.
|
I understand that it’s easy to take a dig:
Well he will always stick up for all TO’s as he is a TO – yes I am but no I don’t.
They didn’t tell me at the start that there was a single supp – Yes they did - but you didn't listen.
If you book a ski holiday then you are entering into a contract with a company. If you choose not to read the contract “before” you pay the deposit then I’m sorry to say that but I find this very strange, but hey, it's your choice. On the same line, if you choose to subjectively read the contract and then (thanks to the company making a final attempt to point out the salient items) you realise that it’s not what you were looking for – you shouldn't jump onto your key board and start slagging them off on the internet.
We don’t charge a single room supp during Jan (but many companies don’t have the buying power that we do), so options are available, if you look. Also, as most hotels a designed to cater for the non-single market, you can’t complain when a hotel (with a limited time span to generate the entire year’s income) charges a premium for empty beds.
Remember that hotels are in business to rent out beds, if you block one or two off by asking to use a twin or triple as a single, then isn’t it perfectly acceptable for the hotel to at least try and generate some income from the beds you have stopped them utilising?
The original question to this thread was.
Can we trust Ski Holiday companies?
In this case yes you can but you need to read the contract “1st” and then decide if it’s what you’re looking for. If it’s not, then simply look somewhere else and don’t start complaining as they don’t provide exactly what you have decided are your prerequisites for an enjoyable holiday.
Oh and
| richardK wrote: |
| Thought other singles looking for a holiday would like to know about this. |
is just a standard cop-out of someone trying to disguise a Pandora see here for details
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Wayne, All your points are well made but the reality is that most people don't read every bit of small print before pricing up a holiday and secondly it wouldn't be unreasonable for an operator/club/agency whose business is single holidays to be clear upfront on the opening page that the pricing model is based on sharing a room. I'm sick of suppliers of all forms that hide away essential information in FAQs - if its fundamental to the customer's understanding of your business or pricing put it on the home page - simple. If honesty and upfrontness loses you a few sales then surely that's better in pissing people off who've had to ferret around for information. I have no experience of Singlesport FTAOD.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
If a single is put in a teeny little boxroom with one small bed, and charged a hefty supplement, that's a rip off. But otherwise, of course they should expect to pay a supplement which equates to the "loss" the TO makes from only getting one person in a double room.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
From Singlesport's Home Page in normal size print.
"We will always use top quality tour operators & will try to find reasonable single room supplements, as well as organising sharing for those who wish to avoid the extra cost. "
How much ferreting is involved here? I'm with Wayne on this one (not that I'm normally not, Wayne is the voice of reason  )
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
And even if it weren't stated so clearly, it would be a big over-optimistic (some might be ruder) to assume that no supplement would be charged.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| fatbob wrote: |
| Wayne, All your points are well made but the reality is that most people don't read every bit of small print before pricing up a holiday ..... |
I'd be interested to see a poll on that - I do, in fact, but I recognise that may not be the norm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
I don't need to read the small print. Someone on here will do it for me.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
The Voice of Reason, yeah. Contract terms are for whimps.
Just sign up, then complain like mad later 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Actual conversation:
Guest: rant rave blah, we haven't had xyz, this is disgraceful our holiday is ruined
Me: I'm dreadfully sorry Madam, but it clearly states in our brochuere here (points to large print in main body of text on relevant page) that we don't do xyz
Guest: (huffily) well I don't bother to read brochures
WTF is a company supposed to do? Come round to your house and read it out to you in person? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Ghost Dog wrote: |
| Wayne is the voice of reason ) |
WTF? Can I claim £5.00?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RichardK If you feel that any business is not being totally fair in their dealings with customers then please continue to highlight such on forums such as these. It is your right and it could be to many other people's benefit. Let them make up their mind if your complaint is fair.
Previously when you told a company who had let you down 'I'll make sure all my friends know about your poor service', they were pretty sure that this might only mean a couple of dozen people. With the internet you can reach millions and the companies hate it.
Unfortunately too many business models are based on providing a product/service that doesn't meet the expectations of the customer. The product is sold highlighting the 'benefits' whilst all the 'negatives' and 'pitfalls' are hidden away in small print.
It is easy for companies to hide the negatives and pitfalls away in 20,000 words of small print terms and conditions and it is obvious to me why they do it.
Don't worry about being accused of throwing a Pandora when companies are more than happy to release a 'Weasel' (Weasel=when a poor service provider smugly says 'didn't you read our terms and conditions?')
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
| If you feel that any business is not being totally fair in their dealings with customers then please continue to highlight such on forums such as these. It is your right |
It's my right....... how many times do we hear that from someone who knows full well (normally incorrectly) what their Rights are but does know (or care) what their Responsibilities are.
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
| Previously when you told a company who had let you down 'I'll make sure all my friends know about your poor service', they were pretty sure that this might only mean a couple of dozen people. With the internet you can reach millions and the companies hate it. |
Agree. But you seem to be forgetting the untold damage that can be done by one or two unfounded allegations.
If companies mess up, then fine, tell everyone if it makes you feel happy (as that’s the real reason it’s done). But (as is the case here – see below) when a company does everything they can to tell you something (like putting it on the HomePage) and you don't read or just ignor it, then maybe you should either keep your opinions to yourself or, if you do make a mistake, then why not be as vociferous in your apology as your were with the initial complaint/comment.
Companies are full of real people with real mortgages, real bills to pay real lives to get on with that can be destroyed by someone “exercising their right to comment” incorrectly.
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
Unfortunately too many business models are based on providing a product/service that doesn't meet the expectations of the customer. The product is sold highlighting the 'benefits' whilst all the 'negatives' and 'pitfalls' are hidden away in small print.
It is easy for companies to hide the negatives and pitfalls away in 20,000 words of small print terms and conditions and it is obvious to me why they do it. |
This is a copy of offending HomePage of the company concerned.
I repeat this is the HomePage – not the small print.
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
| Don't worry about being accused of throwing a Pandora when companies are more than happy to release a 'Weasel' (Weasel=when a poor service provider smugly says 'didn't you read our terms and conditions?') |
Again, the details are clearly displayed on the HomePage not the T&C’s
The OP has made a mistake, thats OK, we all do it but maybe they will delete the original accusation to stop it coming up in a Google search.
PS.
Just to emphasise the point.
I have no connection what-so-ever with the TO mentioned.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wayne, respect! I really, really want to work for you. Maybe it's time for me to learn a bit more than the pidgin Italian I've got...
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Hurtle,
Hmmmmmmm - piccione not pidgin (pigeon)
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
richardK, any TO claiming to be a 'singles specialist' is usually one where they heap you in a room with a complete stranger. Worse still, they might be some sort of extension of an internet dating site. Better to stick with real tried and tested TOs who are normally very transparent about the extra costs involved with having your own room. Yes it's generally a privilege you have to pay a bit extra for, the law of economics demands that after all. I have never paid more than £100 extra for a single room or a twin room for sole use.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Wayne,
| Quote: |
Companies are full of real people with real mortgages, real bills to pay real lives to get on with that can be destroyed by someone “exercising their right to comment” incorrectly
|
Yes indeed, nearly 850 companies have now signed up to bring a class action against one internet review company.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
Robbof, i could get all offended by your post, but seeing as you said you weren't being monkey-ist, i'm gonna let it slide 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Wayne My point was about the right to explain a situation or voice an opinion on the internet. It wasn't about the specifics of RichardK's case.
Obviously, anyone making claims that they can't substantiate needs to be very careful. Also everyone reading complaints should be aware that people are more inclined to complain than to praise. However, if enough complaints about a specific business are made, then it becomes clear that something is wrong. If the internet wasn't available maybe there would be nowhere that people could use to let as many people as possible hear about their dissatisfaction. The business can also use the internet to defend themselves and answer the specific complaints. No-one is stopping them.
If RichardK now believes he got it wrong in his particular case he has the opportunity to say so, but he clearly felt strongly enough to make the point in the first place. Businesses should understand that the customer is not always right but they should be made to feel that they are valued.
If no-one else considers RichardK's opinion is valid then it will be clear for everyone to see, but thank God he has the opportunity to make it. There might have been dozens of others who came forward with similar opinions on that particular company.
I also still maintain that too many companies use the Terms and Conditions to hide all the 'bad news' and to provide scant protection for the customer. The concept of making a fast buck to the detriment of the customer is endemic in this country and it is a worse place because of it. Banks, financial services, utility providers etc etc. etc. They are all at it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Quote: |
The concept of making a fast buck to the detriment of the customer is endemic in this country and it is a worse place because of it.
|
Yep, capitalism - but is there a better system? the internet does give everybody the opportunity to be an informed customer - for example to flip through the terms and conditions of half a dozen holiday companies from the comfort of ones armchair. We have far MORE information readily available to us nowadays than was ever the case in the past. If we're too idle to read it, we really shouldn't complain. There might be some companies who deliberately hide the less attractive aspects of their product - but we have no evidence here of any particular case; just a load of grumbles and assertions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
To emphasise – I have no connection with this TO and had never heard of them until this thread.
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
| My point was about the right to explain a situation or voice an opinion on the internet. |
Obviously not, they may have the right but in some cases not the ability. I did post a question regarding whether a certain site should be censored by an outside organisation or by legislation and (in a so ironic you couldn’t make it up sort of way) the thread was deleted/censored. Hmmmmmmm.
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
| Obviously, anyone making claims that they can't substantiate needs to be very careful. |
Agreed – but do you honestly believe this is the case. Some people will take a malicious and vindictive approach to righting any perceived wrong or simply a lack of service they feel they were entitled to. Care and substantiation tend not to disrupt the sweated palmed exercising of their Right to justice.
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
| Also everyone reading complaints should be aware that people are more inclined to complain than to praise. |
I’ll give you a quote (by Erasmus in 1539) which is just as true now as it was then:
Sad and heuy tydynges be easly blowen abroade be they neuer so vaine and false and they be also sone beleued.
In other words bed news travels faster than good. Or Sh*t sticks
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
| However, if enough complaints about a specific business are made, then it becomes clear that something is wrong. |
No it doesn’t. It “May” do.
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
| If the internet wasn't available maybe there would be nowhere that people could use to let as many people as possible hear about their dissatisfaction. |
Agreed 100%. BUT, if their Dissatisfaction is later proved to be caused by their own misunderstanding of a very simple point should they not then withdraw their comment – yes they should but they hardly ever do. So, should someone not be able to force this issue.
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
| The business can also use the internet to defend themselves and answer the specific complaints. No-one is stopping them. |
The problem here is credibility. You see this on the web - I think ABC’s bread is horrid – it smells funny and tastes really bad.
You also see this answer from ABC – no its not, wel sell millions of loafs per day and we have never had another complaint.
So, millions of people are happy and one ain’t. But the damage is done in that it has cast (albeit a small one) a shadow of doubt over the product in some people’s minds.
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
| If RichardK now believes he got it wrong in his particular case he has the opportunity to say so, but he clearly felt strongly enough to make the point in the first place. |
But he has got it wrong and he hasn’t said so.
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
| Businesses should understand that the customer is not always right but they should be made to feel that they are valued. |
The B&Q near where I live banned (for life) and old guy who was ranting at the sales staff a few weeks ago. They went further and banned him from every B&Q in the UK.
Value, like respect, is double sided.
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
| If no-one else considers RichardK's opinion is valid then it will be clear for everyone to see, but thank God he has the opportunity to make it. |
OK, but when it’s “proved” that the complaint is unfounded why isn’t it deleted.
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
| There might have been dozens of others who came forward with similar opinions on that particular company. |
(in this specific case) If it was a similar opinion then they would all be wrong. The fact that lots of people say the same thing doesn’t make it right. OK, it may be symptomatic of some mix-up in communication. Volume does not necessarily carry validation.
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
| I also still maintain that too many companies use the Terms and Conditions to hide all the 'bad news' and to provide scant protection for the customer. The concept of making a fast buck to the detriment of the customer is endemic in this country and it is a worse place because of it. Banks, financial services, utility providers etc etc. etc. They are all at it. |
They are all at it. Who are “they”? Can you give “any” examples of this (from a TO T&C’s) .
Ski holiday T&C’s are a contract between two entities. You and the TO. They lay out clearly the responsibilities of each party to the contract. They protect you and they protect the TO.
Some group bookings can run into hundreds of thousands of pounds so, as the days of gentleman’s agreements is long gone a contract is needed.
If you don’t agree to the contract, simply don’t enter into it.
Lastly, but most importantly, as I said the damage is already done. This is the 2nd page of a Google search. The only way for this to be negated is for either the OP or a Mod to remove the post – will this happen?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Wayne, I don't know if I'm missing something here, but surely a convincing demolition of richardK's allegation is contained in this very thread, so why the need to censor the thread because of his allegation? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Hurtle,
Think I was trying to answer the points raised by Mr Marmot regarding people's "rights".
I fully agree with the right to have your say if you've been
shafted but it's the other end of scale I was commenting on (maybe really badly  )
Anyway had a few mins to spare before had to get on with my ATOL annual returns - can I complain about the amount of forms different part of the Gov need us to fill in
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wayne, OK. I guess that, because I generally favour freedom of speech over censorship, I'd rather rely on reasoned rebuttal than censorship every time. I acknowledge, however, that this is something of a wavy line and that, say, racism or incitement to violence should sometimes cross that line.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
'comment about your Doctor'
|
I wonder if they will check if you are really a patient of that Dr
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think Wayne's made some fair points. I wouldn't want to see sHs being a regular place for unfair complaints or malicious attacks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
