OFT Investigation

[Lawrence]

Re: OFT Investigation

on another note Ben Nevis in the general forum needs careful handling I suggest me ,Ken or Ade respond and we all talk off the same script

[kwatt]

Expect more. 😉

Hope for none.

K.

[VillageIdiot2]

Re: OFT Investigation

If there is more, IMO, it should be killed. Right there! A very polite post saying along the lines of this thread is not for a discussion on the WTA’s involvement in the OFT investigation, if you’d like more information, or any questions answered, please email blah blah blah or call blah blah blah… The last thing we want is the thread to continue and run the risk of any unwanted public debate going on…?!

Ade 🙂

[Lawrence]

Re: OFT Investigation

Agreed ,with this Guy I think we have to massage his ego slightly whilst also making our point .
The standard letter for benchmarking purposes bit I will insert in to all the thank you for replying letters .
Lawrence

[kwatt]

Where there’s a post in a “public” forum asking for comment? 😉

K.

[Lawrence]

Re: OFT Investigation

I think Ade means “trade” Public,I didn’t like the dig he made about “if you are a member ,this is written on your behalf ” .

[kwatt]

Re: OFT Investigation

Been thinking…

Now the DEGs thing is in I can actually focus on other stuff, like actually doing some proper work for a few days. And perhaps even relax a bit.

Anyways…here’s the thing…

I think that some of this stuff needs a “PR’d” response from anyone within this room so I’d suggest that you/we share as much as possible but there are some basics that we should all try not too deviate too far from as, sh1t will probably fly.

What’ll happen is that some closet will get the report and go along to XXX in XXX company and say, “Have you seen this?” to curry favour or whatever. The fact that, if Ade fixes the link, they can’t admit to having a confidential document sent only to agents makes them maybe know how that sh1t feels. And it allows us to ask how they got a copy, backfoot from the get go.

Asides… basics…

The WTA is there to represent its members and to make the members opinions known to anyone that asks. Just like AMDEA, DASA or any other trade association.

It is there to protect its members interests, just like the others.

What was fed back to the OFT was a combination of member’s opinions and experience coupled with research carried out on their behalf and at their request by the WTA administration.

The WTA members encompass a broad spectrum, not any one singular group of repairers nor does it exist to serve any one group or faction other than the independent appliance repair trade at large as a whole.

Many companies are seen to be, from the members point of view, damaging their ability to compete, trade openly and fairly. That’s their opinion it’s up to companies within the industry to prove that position wrong.

Any specific points that want addressing should be put in writing to the association for consideration or discussed at one of our meetings during an open floor session. That’s a tough one, but worth a shot and saves some ar$ehole tripping one of us up then quoting us or playing back a recording of a conversation. And, before you say it, the likes of DAG record all conversations.

There is no discussion on rates between members that we are aware of other than in the broadest of terms, which tend to lean more towards strategies and general trends in rates.

We need to be very, very careful on the collusion thing lest some idiot tries to wheel out the anti-trust stuff.

As usual, you think of this stuff after you’re on the spot and have answered, like the ben nevis thing. :rolls:

K.

[Lawrence]

Re: OFT Investigation

agreed as I said earlier we need a party line ,and the stock line for any info req of us is “Request in writing please “

[kwatt]

I neutered the link on the TA site to the full report and bodged the articles up.

Tired, CBA tonight and my brain is fried. So, it’s the best I could do with it.

K.

[Lawrence]

Re: OFT Investigation

Why are we linking to DASA from our web site 😕 can someone remove or change please .

[bazza500]

Re: OFT Investigation

Lawrence wrote:on another note Ben Nevis in the general forum needs careful handling I suggest me ,Ken or Ade respond and we all talk off the same script

I am going to tell you where I stand…

I find that post very patronising. Are you suggesting that only 3 people of the WTA council are capable of responsding and that there is a discussion going on between the 3 members mentioned that the rest of us are not privvy to?

Does this statement also apply to DrDill?.

I for one would like to ask DrDill a few questions but at this moment I am wondering if I have to wait for permission?

Sorry if this sounds blunt but it is the way it is coming across.

[kwatt]

Re: OFT Investigation

I don’t think that was the way Lawrence intended it to come across but, I can see how you could’ve gotten that. 😕

But I can’t speak for him and, whilst he’s disabled ATM, he types really slow. 😆

TBH, today I was just having fun with our Mr Dill. I was a bit at a loose end so…

But yesterday he really annoyed me, again, with the comments about a cartel.

But as you all know I’ve no issue with a debate going into free fall as it’s usually good clean fun and I’m certainly not one for suppressing opinion.

K.

[Lawrence]

Re: OFT Investigation

I don’t mind blunt ,you will have to bear with me Barry I broke my wrist at christmas and shouldn’t be driving so am like a bear with a sore head because of it either that or am spaced out on painkillers so am not so on the ball as usual(if ever:lol: just before someone says it ),I have just re read the post and you are right it does come over in an awful manner sorry that absolutely wasn’t intended .
To put it in to context I wasn’t sure what Ben nevis was up to and wondered if he was trying to draw us into contradicting one another so he could have a go at the WTA. the ONLY reason I mentioned Ade,Myself & Ken was me as Chair,Ken as one who had already got in to a discussion and was named by Ben along with Ade because he was mentioned also I just wanted to take the heat of the OFT thread .I hope that makes sense ,once again sorry .

You don’t need my permission to ask Dill some questions
My thoughts are despite all he says he does have an issue with the WTA ,at Coventry in a roundabout way he accused me of being an ineffective Chairman and also wanted to know where UKW fitted as well as some other things that I took exception to ,
hope that helps if not ring me 07788583589
Lawrence (this took me 30 mins to type :rolls: )

[kwatt]

Re: OFT Investigation

Oh and just for the record…

T the other night, when I explained Lawrence’s current plight, decided that “a lot of elderly people have fallen during the bad weather and broken something.”

Which would have been amusing had she not added, “you’ve just been luckier than Lawrence”.

Got two for the price of one, b1tch. 😆

So if she slags you next week, nuffin’ to do with me.

K.

[Lawrence]

Re: OFT Investigation

kwatt wrote:
Which would have been amusing had she not added, “you’ve just been luckier than Lawrence”.K.

you have no idea how much that has cheered me up 😆

[Author]

Posts