Menu
Login
firstly they try to sell you either Google search engine optimization or Facebook advertising.. be warned you will not receive either ...what will happen is ...they sneakily attempt to get you on a rolling contract which takes 30 days written notice to cancel by then you've probably already paid a whopping £500 for something that might cost £20 to do your self . These people will then threaten you will all sorts of stuff including personal debt collectors and legal action if you should cancel your debit / credit card ...
these say they work in london have a po box address in london but are really a manchester out fit with 2 adresses
/removed/
more info on him to follow...
The complaint has been investigated and resolved to the customer’s satisfaction.
Tom Faulkner, I think you give an exact precise and I quote:
"...TSMP faked being a solicitor - and therefore lied.
TSMP faked up a Director - and therefore lied.
TSMP faked up a 'legal agent (Barker-Smith) to threaten someone else - and therefore lied.
TSMP faked up a method of tracing me to accuse me of libel in order to silence crticism - and therefore lied.
TSMP has now made a feeble attempt to explain the issue - and has missed the point; deliberately or not?.."
But rest assured they will invariable 'paint' over the issues that concern people the most because they are incapable of answering them with any reasonable satisfaction as they will expose themselves for the SCAM they are!
Incidentally, I am not Steve Badbiz although I now have a passion to do everything in my power to ensure that anybody who has any doubts to your companies ability, integrity, honesty, professionalism and ethics will be educated; and I will do my utmost to ensure that they know what a malicious, liar and scammer you and your companies are.
The Social Media People. a company who claims to have, variously, 12, 000 customers, 15, 000 customers, 24, 000 customers and today 200, 000 customers over 11 years but have not actually been going that long according to the records of companies house. That's simply amazing, don't you think?
It's a good point that Edsarn makes. A problem for companies like The Social Media People, Net66 etc is that when they get such a bad reputation, people are suspicious about everything to do with them.
The advert may have been genuine, created by an aggrieved ex-employee, or anyone else with a low opinion of TSMP. (Form an orderly queue!) In refusing to change the ad. an adjudication was inevitable when a complaint was made.
But if you have a less than favourable attitude towards TSMP - as I believe some visitors to this thread have - you could envisage that TSMP might have created the advert itself, then complained about it in the full knowledge that an adjudication in its favour would follow; and hey-presto! there is something which seems to support its view of itself.
I don't know which is true, but whatever the truth is, it does not outweigh the mountain of evidence which demonstartes the multiple shortcomings and misdemeanours of The Social Media People.
But at least TSMP has now recognised that the phone calls to me were genuine, so everyone who hears them can judge them in that knowledge.
What is the Adjudication number of this case that the ASA has ruled on? The problem is that where they say no evidence has been produced, the ASA only looked at the advert as published on the net whereas we all know that is not where the problem with this company lies. Knowing what has been purported for the truth here we don't know who actually put this advert up in the first place, and the ASA acknowledge this, and it very conveniently allows a complaint. Let's not forget that the language of this 'advert' actually comes from a similar stable.
Possibly for the very first time, The Social Media People has responded to the question about the fictitious solicitor. However the explanation is unsatisfactory as the facts of the event differ from those offered as explantion.
TSMP's Public Relations Department just wrote:
"Thanks for posting yet more irrelevant information. If you were contacted by a legal agent it is because you committed what's called libel, as has Steve Jones. As have one or two other people. If you have not been taken to court it is due to your assets not out weighing the cost. ..."
My response is as follows:
I was contacted by a person claiming to be a solicitor - not a legal agent. The contact was confirmed by a Director of TSMP in his phone message to me. The Solicitors Regulatory Authority has no record of the solicitor, nor the Firm he claimed to work for; which effectively means he and the Firm do not exist. The accusation was slander, not libel (that came later).
In the phone message to me the Director of TSMP lied by saying I had been traced by 'IP tracking, that sort of thing...' As TSMP was accusing the wrong person (a fact confirmed by TSMP in an email published on this site) it couldn't have traced be by that method, because it was not me.
Whether or not TSMP decided to take me to court is irrelevant to this part of the discussion. Whatever another person may, or may not be worth financially is irrelevant to this part of the discussion.
TSMP faked being a solicitor - and therefore lied.
TSMP faked up a Director - and therefore lied.
TSMP faked up a 'legal agent (Barker-Smith) to threaten someone else - and therefore lied.
TSMP faked up a method of tracing me to accuse me of libel in order to silence crticism - and therefore lied.
TSMP has now made a feeble attempt to explain the issue - and has missed the point; deliberately or not?
Good Morning Readers,
Thanks for posting yet more irrelevant information. If you were contacted by a legal agent it is because you committed what's called libel, as has Steve Jones. As have one or two other people. If you have not been taken to court it is due to your assets not out weighing the cost.
You can put a spin on anything, you have made so many complaints that if you had any actual case for these criminal acts you claims TSMP have committed then we would have had to answer to them.
Infact the only 1 who has taken you seriously DID investigate our company and I think by now you know what they have found:
Before we remind you of that please read:
We have worked with 200, 000 clients over the past 11+ years and we have always had fantastic feedback.
_________________________________________________________________________________
With regret we are forced to expose a few characters for their nasty tendencies, opinions & backgrounds so their wrongful claims against us can be treated with the level of belief they should - NONE AT ALL.
We may be biased, in that our organisation has been involved in business 11+ years & is now suddenly wrongfully accused of having no ethics & even "scamming". This has been a hard accusation to face as we are a family business, and our directors have taken a few insults personally and even resorted to defending their integrity themselves. Needless to say it has fell on deaf ears and accusations are constantly thrown in our direction.
We have no personal feelings either way, yes we think there is incredulous people commenting and lying on here, but on the whole we know the truth. So do our expanding clients base.
_________________________________________________________________________________
So, is The Social Media People a scam, are people right to group together to try to ruin the reputation of a company within a an organisation for 11+ years?
Let me provide some EVIDENCE not twisted words or opinions - EVIDENCE:
There was an add set up, the creator was never proven beyond reasonable doubt as the address & contact details did not match up and could have been set up anonymously by anyone. For this reason we will blank the web address, bout the info is readily available from the ASA:
ASA Adjudication on the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk
the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk
Date: 27 July 2011
Media: Internet (search engine)
Sector: Business
Number of complaints: 1
Complaint Ref: A11-154984
Ad
A Google sponsored search ad stated “Social media people scam net66-the social media people AVOID this company is a scam www.the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk.”
Issue
The Social Media People objected that the ad denigrated their business.
Response
www.the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk said the ad was produced by an individual who had worked for The Social Media People. He stated that the claims in the ad were true and that he intended to continue making similar claims on other sites.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA noted that the complainant’s company was called The Social Media People and understood that any consumers searching for ‘Social Media People’ via Google would see the advertisers’ sponsored search ad appear alongside the search engine results. We considered that the ad was alleging that the Social Media People was a company running a scam and because we had not seen evidence to support that claim, we considered that that implication was disparaging to the complainant’s company. We therefore concluded that the ad denigrated The Social Media People.
The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) 3.42 and 3.43 (Imitation and denigration).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form.
_________________________________________________________________________________
I will also quote one of our directors responses in relation to this as it suits our view point perfectly:
I will refer back to the ruling of an ADVERTISING WATCHDOG for people to read & derive their opinions of us not anonymous, malicious & obsessed individuals.
Please read these details:
The ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) Says: "consumers searching for ‘Social Media People’ via Google would see the advertisers’ sponsored search ad appear alongside the search engine results. We considered that the ad was alleging that the Social Media People was a company running a scam and because we had not seen evidence to support that claim"
Who Are The ASA: The ASA is the UK’s independent watchdog committed to maintaining high standards in advertising for the benefit of consumers, advertisers and society at large. Visit this section for an introduction to the ASA, our remit, history and meet our senior team members.
*************************************************************************************************************
If you wish to call us a scam, please don't expect to be believed, complaints are fine, with the amount of customers we have we expect to have unhappy customers, but calling us a scam is different, not ethical & certainly NOT TRUE.
*************************************************************************************************************
We are available for contact For any body who is looking for answers, or is still unsure:
Tel: Tel: [protected]
Email: publicrelations@thesocialmediapeople.co.uk
We are happy to deal with enquiries, and answer any questions or queries you may have.
Regards
Public Relations Team
@ The Social Media People
Hello all, this does make for interesting reading. I too was promised a nationally exclusive advert on Facebook costing over £350 for a month. I was made aware that the advert taken out through the Social Media People would be shown to 10's of thousands of people, as long as their interests were matched with the keywrds relating to my advert. Needless to say, my facebook page for the business in which the advert was for has hundereds of likes to relevent pages yet the advert was not displayed to me once. I even ran a competition for anyone that liked my page that sent a screenshot of the advert on their screen, to win a prize. No one sent anything.. yet more indication that the advert did not actually exist. When having sent the letter cancelling the advertising with them, the same as many people have found "we have received no letter". This was only realised by myself after i received an invoice from them saying payment had been taken for a second months advertising, days prior to the end of the month i had running with them. A second letter was sent to them the same day as receiving this early second invoice, this was recieved and email confirmation was sent saying my account had been closed. I have since received further communications from them stating that this second letter was also received too late and that i owe them yet more money. What i do have though is a littl nugget of information, evidence of just how unprofessional this company is...
On trying to speak with the manager of the company i was put on hold telling me they were not available. I held on for a loing time, feeling sure something fish was going on i called on my mobile on my other hand, i was told i was going to be put straight through and the lady thought she had put me on hold... i have my mobile phone recirding of a conversation that i then heard within the office of the social media people, realising who i was on thios second line, them meking up stories about how i had apparently told the firstman i was placed on hold by, that i was going to come down there, kick off, and that i was swearing at them. This of course is not true at all. I then continued to hear that the member of staff that was apparently unavailable ask around the offuice to see if anyoine else wanted to speak with me as they "couldnt be bothered to deal with me". When someone did come ont he phone they were made aware of the fact i had the conversation recorded and needless to say, crapped their pants.
Since then they have tried to say this is not allowed, it is if they were aware of it, and there is auditory evidence showing they were. I have since spoken with trading standards and my solicitor and in am now awaiting them taking legal action against me. I will certainly be defending myself with the quite thick foilder of counter evidence against them, as well as making a counter claim against them for breach of contract for not actually lfilling their role of advertising my company.
SPEAK TO TRADING STANDARDS PEOPLE AND DONT GIVE UP IS YOU DID EVERYTHING RIGHT!
There's much to confuse, and many irrelevant exchanges and insults -
Keep in mind that the issue is the appalling business practices, and lack of integrity, honesty and ethics of The Social Media People.
When a company director phones customers using a fictitious identity while making threats it shows the company in its true colours.
Listen to : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IY-LQ4kFaa8
The fake director states that a solicitor contacted me - but the solicitor was a fake too - and TSMP refused to say who it was. The other character, Jonathan Barker-Smith phoned another customer and demanded the customer phone back to speak to him; but the customer was never able to make contact - because of course - he was a fake.
TSMP has continuously ignored this issue and never offered an explanation either in private or in public.
To answer the question would reveal the despicable double dealings of TSMP and its directors.
Good Morning Readers,
Anybody who receives any confidential information about us please email to:
legal.team@thesocialmediapeople.co.uk
________________________________________________________________________________
Please do not get distracted from the point, we have had many nasty accusations from personal to business, and from people taking pictures of the building to hacking our online forum accounts, both on here and badbiz.
Please do not get distracted from a good company defending its reputation and having proof that there is no evidence to prove we are ever have been, or have ever participated in any "scams".
________________________________________________________________________________
Having to defend our ethics on a daily basis has now got beyond a joke. If we put a comer or full stop in the wrong place we are the victim of a tirade of abuse. If anybody who participates in these daily insults should not only be ashamed of themselves but should rethink the point they are trying to make. Why nit pick & wait for a company to make the smallest irrelevant mistake and jump on them with insults insinuating they are incompetent. We have been reported to every authority in the UK by most of you & they have all found us to comply with law.
We have worked with 200, 000 clients over the past 11+ years and we have always had fantastic feedback.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Also as long as people try to call us a "scam" and unethical we WILL continue to post details of the ASA regulation. Because neutral readers deserve facts not one person pretending to be 12's opinions & lies.
_________________________________________________________________________________
With regret we are forced to expose a few characters for their nasty tendencies, opinions & backgrounds so their wrongful claims against us can be treated with the level of belief they should - NONE AT ALL.
We may be biased, in that our organisation has been involved in business 11+ years & is now suddenly wrongfully accused of having no ethics & even "scamming". This has been a hard accusation to face as we are a family business, and our directors have taken a few insults personally and even resorted to defending their integrity themselves. Needless to say it has fell on deaf ears and accusations are constantly thrown in our direction.
We have no personal feelings either way, yes we think there is incredulous people commenting and lying on here, but on the whole we know the truth. So do our expanding clients base.
_________________________________________________________________________________
So, is The Social Media People a scam, are people right to group together to try to ruin the reputation of a company within a an organisation for 11+ years?
Let me provide some EVIDENCE not twisted words or opinions - EVIDENCE:
There was an add set up, the creator was never proven beyond reasonable doubt as the address & contact details did not match up and could have been set up anonymously by anyone. For this reason we will blank the web address, bout the info is readily available from the ASA:
ASA Adjudication on the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk
the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk
Date: 27 July 2011
Media: Internet (search engine)
Sector: Business
Number of complaints: 1
Complaint Ref: A11-154984
Ad
A Google sponsored search ad stated “Social media people scam net66-the social media people AVOID this company is a scam www.the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk.”
Issue
The Social Media People objected that the ad denigrated their business.
Response
www.the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk said the ad was produced by an individual who had worked for The Social Media People. He stated that the claims in the ad were true and that he intended to continue making similar claims on other sites.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA noted that the complainant’s company was called The Social Media People and understood that any consumers searching for ‘Social Media People’ via Google would see the advertisers’ sponsored search ad appear alongside the search engine results. We considered that the ad was alleging that the Social Media People was a company running a scam and because we had not seen evidence to support that claim, we considered that that implication was disparaging to the complainant’s company. We therefore concluded that the ad denigrated The Social Media People.
The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) 3.42 and 3.43 (Imitation and denigration).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form.
_________________________________________________________________________________
I will also quote one of our directors responses in relation to this as it suits our view point perfectly:
I will refer back to the ruling of an ADVERTISING WATCHDOG for people to read & derive their opinions of us not anonymous, malicious & obsessed individuals.
Please read these details:
The ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) Says: "consumers searching for ‘Social Media People’ via Google would see the advertisers’ sponsored search ad appear alongside the search engine results. We considered that the ad was alleging that the Social Media People was a company running a scam and because we had not seen evidence to support that claim"
Who Are The ASA: The ASA is the UK’s independent watchdog committed to maintaining high standards in advertising for the benefit of consumers, advertisers and society at large. Visit this section for an introduction to the ASA, our remit, history and meet our senior team members.
*************************************************************************************************************
If you wish to call us a scam, please don't expect to be believed, complaints are fine, with the amount of customers we have we expect to have unhappy customers, but calling us a scam is different, not ethical & certainly NOT TRUE.
*************************************************************************************************************
We are available for contact For any body who is looking for answers, or is still unsure:
Tel: Tel: [protected]
Email: publicrelations@thesocialmediapeople.co.uk
We are happy to deal with enquiries, and answer any questions or queries you may have.
Regards
Public Relations Team
@ The Social Media People
URGENT MESSAGE TO POSTERS IF YOU RECEIVE A MESSAGE FROM CAMILLAS CHINCHILLA DO NOT RESPOND, WE HAVE HAD OUR COMMENTS HACKED AND IF YOU RECEIVE A MESSAGE FROM THEM PLEASE NOTIFY US AS THEY MAY HAVE CLIENT INFORMATION.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Having to defend our ethics on a daily basis has now got beyond a joke. If we put a comer or full stop in the wrong place we are the victim of a tirade of abuse. If anybody who participates in these daily insults should not only be ashamed of themselves but should rethink the point they are trying to make. Why nit pick & wait for a company to make the smallest irrelevant mistake and jump on them with insults insinuating they are incompetent. We have been reported to every authority in the UK by most of you & they have all found us to comply with law.
We have worked with 200, 000 clients over the past 11+ years and we have always had fantastic feedback.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Also as long as people try to call us a "scam" and unethical we WILL continue to post details of the ASA regulation. Because neutral readers deserve facts not one person pretending to be 12's opinions & lies.
_________________________________________________________________________________
With regret we are forced to expose a few characters for their nasty tendencies, opinions & backgrounds so their wrongful claims against us can be treated with the level of belief they should - NONE AT ALL.
We may be biased, in that our organisation has been involved in business 11+ years & is now suddenly wrongfully accused of having no ethics & even "scamming". This has been a hard accusation to face as we are a family business, and our directors have taken a few insults personally and even resorted to defending their integrity themselves. Needless to say it has fell on deaf ears and accusations are constantly thrown in our direction.
We have no personal feelings either way, yes we think there is incredulous people commenting and lying on here, but on the whole we know the truth. So do our expanding clients base.
_________________________________________________________________________________
So, is The Social Media People a scam, are people right to group together to try to ruin the reputation of a company within a an organisation for 11+ years?
Let me provide some EVIDENCE not twisted words or opinions - EVIDENCE:
There was an add set up, the creator was never proven beyond reasonable doubt as the address & contact details did not match up and could have been set up anonymously by anyone. For this reason we will blank the web address, bout the info is readily available from the ASA:
ASA Adjudication on the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk
the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk
Date: 27 July 2011
Media: Internet (search engine)
Sector: Business
Number of complaints: 1
Complaint Ref: A11-154984
Ad
A Google sponsored search ad stated “Social media people scam net66-the social media people AVOID this company is a scam www.the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk.”
Issue
The Social Media People objected that the ad denigrated their business.
Response
www.the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk said the ad was produced by an individual who had worked for The Social Media People. He stated that the claims in the ad were true and that he intended to continue making similar claims on other sites.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA noted that the complainant’s company was called The Social Media People and understood that any consumers searching for ‘Social Media People’ via Google would see the advertisers’ sponsored search ad appear alongside the search engine results. We considered that the ad was alleging that the Social Media People was a company running a scam and because we had not seen evidence to support that claim, we considered that that implication was disparaging to the complainant’s company. We therefore concluded that the ad denigrated The Social Media People.
The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) 3.42 and 3.43 (Imitation and denigration).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form.
_________________________________________________________________________________
I will also quote one of our directors responses in relation to this as it suits our view point perfectly:
I will refer back to the ruling of an ADVERTISING WATCHDOG for people to read & derive their opinions of us not anonymous, malicious & obsessed individuals.
Please read these details:
The ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) Says: "consumers searching for ‘Social Media People’ via Google would see the advertisers’ sponsored search ad appear alongside the search engine results. We considered that the ad was alleging that the Social Media People was a company running a scam and because we had not seen evidence to support that claim"
Who Are The ASA: The ASA is the UK’s independent watchdog committed to maintaining high standards in advertising for the benefit of consumers, advertisers and society at large. Visit this section for an introduction to the ASA, our remit, history and meet our senior team members.
*************************************************************************************************************
If you wish to call us a scam, please don't expect to be believed, complaints are fine, with the amount of customers we have we expect to have unhappy customers, but calling us a scam is different, not ethical & certainly NOT TRUE.
*************************************************************************************************************
We are available for contact For any body who is looking for answers, or is still unsure:
Tel: Tel: [protected]
Email: publicrelations@thesocialmediapeople.co.uk
We are happy to deal with enquiries, and answer any questions or queries you may have.
Regards
Public Relations Team
@ The Social Media People
Good Afternoon,
We can confirm many readers of this post have got in touch & have had resolutions to their issues. If you say were a scam were this, were that, you will be put as low priority. If your unhappy fair en0ugh, it doesn't mean you have been ripped off. Especially now we see proof we are not a "scam" or anything like unethical (well from advertising watchdogs not from posters on here) it kind of spells out the problems we are having.
Also as previously mentioned, if you have participated in verbally abusing the companies ethics do not expect to be acknowledged. We make a reasonable attempt with everybody but for those who continuing accuse the company of nasty acts & other such insinuations, please do not expect to ask questions and get answers.
Its a two way thing. Also in terms of childish and unprofessional we find that to be ridiculous, we are here to delegate & to speak to any genuine customers, although we have fast learned there are none.
Just a bunch of angry people spreading some malicious lies.
_________________________________________________________________________________
In response to Janette, for the record,
You have sent an invoice in to us by accident I presume Tom Faulkner has contacted you in an attempt to "offer advice" about dealings with us. And the invoice is a different company! Its not even us.
Yes you were contacted and after a long period with no reply we presumed you had your wires crossed, you certainly have not messaged our director Mr. McVey on here.
_________________________________________________________________________________
We have over 15, 000 social media clients and have had 21 genuine complaints.
That is 0.0014% of customers unhappy about the service.
If you are a genuine customer who is unhappy or wishes to lodge a complaint, please get in contact. Due to the amount of lies from non-customers & competitors please have your customer details ready.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Having to defend our ethics on a daily basis has now got beyond a joke. If we put a comer or full stop in the wrong place we are the victim of a tirade of abuse. If anybody who participates in these daily insults should not only be ashamed of themselves but should rethink the point they are trying to make. Why nit pick & wait for a company to make the smallest irrelevant mistake and jump on them with insults insinuating they are incompetent. We have been reported to every authority in the UK by most of you & they have all found us to comply with law.
We have worked with 200, 000 clients over the past 11+ years and we have always had fantastic feedback.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Also as long as people try to call us a "scam" and unethical we WILL continue to post details of the ASA regulation. Because neutral readers deserve facts not one person pretending to be 12's opinions & lies.
_________________________________________________________________________________
With regret we are forced to expose a few characters for their nasty tendencies, opinions & backgrounds so their wrongful claims against us can be treated with the level of belief they should - NONE AT ALL.
We may be biased, in that our organisation has been involved in business 11+ years & is now suddenly wrongfully accused of having no ethics & even "scamming". This has been a hard accusation to face as we are a family business, and our directors have taken a few insults personally and even resorted to defending their integrity themselves. Needless to say it has fell on deaf ears and accusations are constantly thrown in our direction.
We have no personal feelings either way, yes we think there is incredulous people commenting and lying on here, but on the whole we know the truth. So do our expanding clients base.
_________________________________________________________________________________
So, is The Social Media People a scam, are people right to group together to try to ruin the reputation of a company within a an organisation for 11+ years?
Let me provide some EVIDENCE not twisted words or opinions - EVIDENCE:
There was an add set up, the creator was never proven beyond reasonable doubt as the address & contact details did not match up and could have been set up anonymously by anyone. For this reason we will blank the web address, bout the info is readily available from the ASA:
ASA Adjudication on the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk
the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk
Date: 27 July 2011
Media: Internet (search engine)
Sector: Business
Number of complaints: 1
Complaint Ref: A11-154984
Ad
A Google sponsored search ad stated “Social media people scam net66-the social media people AVOID this company is a scam www.the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk.”
Issue
The Social Media People objected that the ad denigrated their business.
Response
www.the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk said the ad was produced by an individual who had worked for The Social Media People. He stated that the claims in the ad were true and that he intended to continue making similar claims on other sites.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA noted that the complainant’s company was called The Social Media People and understood that any consumers searching for ‘Social Media People’ via Google would see the advertisers’ sponsored search ad appear alongside the search engine results. We considered that the ad was alleging that the Social Media People was a company running a scam and because we had not seen evidence to support that claim, we considered that that implication was disparaging to the complainant’s company. We therefore concluded that the ad denigrated The Social Media People.
The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) 3.42 and 3.43 (Imitation and denigration).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form.
_________________________________________________________________________________
I will also quote one of our directors responses in relation to this as it suits our view point perfectly:
I will refer back to the ruling of an ADVERTISING WATCHDOG for people to read & derive their opinions of us not anonymous, malicious & obsessed individuals.
Please read these details:
The ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) Says: "consumers searching for ‘Social Media People’ via Google would see the advertisers’ sponsored search ad appear alongside the search engine results. We considered that the ad was alleging that the Social Media People was a company running a scam and because we had not seen evidence to support that claim"
Who Are The ASA: The ASA is the UK’s independent watchdog committed to maintaining high standards in advertising for the benefit of consumers, advertisers and society at large. Visit this section for an introduction to the ASA, our remit, history and meet our senior team members.
*************************************************************************************************************
If you wish to call us a scam, please don't expect to be believed, complaints are fine, with the amount of customers we have we expect to have unhappy customers, but calling us a scam is different, not ethical & certainly NOT TRUE.
*************************************************************************************************************
We are available for contact For any body who is looking for answers, or is still unsure:
Tel: Tel: [protected]
Email: publicrelations@thesocialmediapeople.co.uk
We are happy to deal with enquiries, and answer any questions or queries you may have.
Regards
Public Relations Team
@ The Social Media People
Well... You'd think The Social Media People Public Relations would be slightly less childish and unprofessional than the now silenced Tom McVey but sadly not the case. They also lack the same basic grasp of the English language and a similar dislike to an apostrophe... Funny that. It's clearly just a company (or person under god knows how many aliases) that likes a bit of an argument. My advice to all you scammed (Yes, SCAMMED, Social Media People!) by these FRAUDS is to just cancel your card, ignore the volatile ### they send you and sleep easy at night knowing they can't touch you.
What address is the newly formed 'Public Relations Department' based at may we ask?
Just for the record,
Last week McVey asked me, by the messaging service, to contact him personally to discuss and hopefully sort out any problems I may have had with his company.
I replied very politely to his request explaining all the problems I have had.
Sadly, but not unexpected, no reply.
He should spend less time writing pages of rubbish, and more time trying to make his customers happy.
Some 90 days ago I made a couple of posts on this board to the effect that the TSMP were not a company to deal with. It seems from correspondence put up recently that several other posters were accused wrongly of being 'iockus' and of putting these so called libelous posts up. Steven Jackson also phoned me, getting the number by deduction perhaps after all else failed and while I offered to listen to Steven Jackson (as he continually offers to do on here but now in the person of Tom McVey) and latterly Grace Elizabeth of TSMP I have to report that the exercise has been quite futile.Rather than a clean break and no hassle they are still accusing me of many things and still trying to charge me for advertising I have not had. They acknowledged my cancellation in March but denied it was valid (and said it was ten days late - a common theme?) because I had challenged the fact that I had signed up for a rolling contract rather than just coughing up.
Good Morning Readers,
Again there seems to be plenty of verbal abuse hurled at us over night. It still begs the question, if we are a "scam" & do all these illegal & unethical things we are accused of daily why have we being trading for so long & so successfully. If you think we are unethical or unlawful, report us to the relevant authorities.
Thats why we have laws, governing bodies and independent adjudicators.
Its what makes this country great. We have authorities to investigate claims made by people. Obviously there has been many many claims made against us, yet there has been no punishments or repercussions.
Q. - Why would people continue to call us every name under the sun on forums everyday? Why not just let the relevant authorities deal with it.
A. - Because they are false claims. We Have so many clients & are so well known because we provide a fantastic service. We have thousands of happy customers.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Having to defend our ethics on a daily basis has now got beyond a joke. If we put a comer or full stop in the wrong place we are the victim of a tirade of abuse. If anybody who participates in these daily insults should not only be ashamed of themselves but should rethink the point they are trying to make. Why nit pick & wait for a company to make the smallest irrelevant mistake and jump on them with insults insinuating they are incompetent. We have been reported to every authority in the UK by most of you & they have all found us to comply with law.
We have worked with 200, 000 clients over the past 11+ years and we have always had fantastic feedback.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Also as long as people try to call us a "scam" and unethical we WILL continue to post details of the ASA regulation. Because neutral readers deserve facts not one person pretending to be 12's opinions & lies.
_________________________________________________________________________________
With regret we are forced to expose a few characters for their nasty tendencies, opinions & backgrounds so their wrongful claims against us can be treated with the level of belief they should - NONE AT ALL.
We may be biased, in that our organisation has been involved in business 11+ years & is now suddenly wrongfully accused of having no ethics & even "scamming". This has been a hard accusation to face as we are a family business, and our directors have taken a few insults personally and even resorted to defending their integrity themselves. Needless to say it has fell on deaf ears and accusations are constantly thrown in our direction.
We have no personal feelings either way, yes we think there is incredulous people commenting and lying on here, but on the whole we know the truth. So do our expanding clients base.
_________________________________________________________________________________
So, is The Social Media People a scam, are people right to group together to try to ruin the reputation of a company within a an organisation for 11+ years?
Let me provide some EVIDENCE not twisted words or opinions - EVIDENCE:
There was an add set up, the creator was never proven beyond reasonable doubt as the address & contact details did not match up and could have been set up anonymously by anyone. For this reason we will blank the web address, bout the info is readily available from the ASA:
ASA Adjudication on the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk
the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk
Date: 27 July 2011
Media: Internet (search engine)
Sector: Business
Number of complaints: 1
Complaint Ref: A11-154984
Ad
A Google sponsored search ad stated “Social media people scam net66-the social media people AVOID this company is a scam www.the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk.”
Issue
The Social Media People objected that the ad denigrated their business.
Response
www.the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk said the ad was produced by an individual who had worked for The Social Media People. He stated that the claims in the ad were true and that he intended to continue making similar claims on other sites.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA noted that the complainant’s company was called The Social Media People and understood that any consumers searching for ‘Social Media People’ via Google would see the advertisers’ sponsored search ad appear alongside the search engine results. We considered that the ad was alleging that the Social Media People was a company running a scam and because we had not seen evidence to support that claim, we considered that that implication was disparaging to the complainant’s company. We therefore concluded that the ad denigrated The Social Media People.
The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) 3.42 and 3.43 (Imitation and denigration).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form.
_________________________________________________________________________________
I will also quote one of our directors responses in relation to this as it suits our view point perfectly:
I will refer back to the ruling of an ADVERTISING WATCHDOG for people to read & derive their opinions of us not anonymous, malicious & obsessed individuals.
Please read these details:
The ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) Says: "consumers searching for ‘Social Media People’ via Google would see the advertisers’ sponsored search ad appear alongside the search engine results. We considered that the ad was alleging that the Social Media People was a company running a scam and because we had not seen evidence to support that claim"
Who Are The ASA: The ASA is the UK’s independent watchdog committed to maintaining high standards in advertising for the benefit of consumers, advertisers and society at large. Visit this section for an introduction to the ASA, our remit, history and meet our senior team members.
*************************************************************************************************************
If you wish to call us a scam, please don't expect to be believed, complaints are fine, with the amount of customers we have we expect to have unhappy customers, but calling us a scam is different, not ethical & certainly NOT TRUE.
*************************************************************************************************************
We are available for contact For any body who is looking for answers, or is still unsure:
Tel: Tel: [protected]
Email: publicrelations@thesocialmediapeople.co.uk
We are happy to deal with enquiries, and answer any questions or queries you may have.
Regards
Public Relations Team
@ The Social Media People
Does anyone know why a letter sent to the official, 'Registered Office Address' of The Social Media People, at 4th Floor, Albany House, 324/326 Regent Street, London, W1B 3HH - gets reurned marked 'Not Known Here'?
Does anyone know if The Social Media People needs an appointment made if an interested party wishes to inspect the company documents at the official place for inspection - 1 Portugal St East, Manchester, M1 2WX
Does anyone know if The Social Media People's recorded VAT address is still at Rammon House, 1 Portugal Street East, Manchester, M1 2wx?
Does anyone know if The Social Media People's Public Relations Department shares the same suite of offices as Customer Relations; at 4th Floor, Albany House, 324/326 Regent Street, London W1B 3HH?
tom mcvey, you are a complete and utter ### head, you never answer any straight forward questions people ask you, i dont care about asa who ever that is, you tricked me into a rolling contract with you, you just kept taking that money off my card when i told you to stop, you just kept telling me about terms and bloody conditions and then threatening me with legal action if i didnt continue to pay up, you know what GOOD OLD YELLOW PAGES, ! at least you know where stand
So, what kind of 'advertising' is that?
When I say it speaks volumes, I can only assume from watching the video that the telephone calls are from someone at TSMP who appears to be a Solicitor called Jonathan Barker Smith or similar sounding name (Tom McVey sounds a similar name!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IY-LQ4kFaa8
The above You Tube video is very interesting - have a look at it, it speaks volumes!
03-08-2011: ASA Complaint submission on The Social Media People
Here is another page of the ‘complaint’. Amazingly the recent changes on the TSMP website also coincide EXACTLY with the submission to ASA.
The spontaneous changes, even down to individual words, TSMP made to its website at the time the ASA was processing a complaint are truly miraculous.
However, the end result is that TSMP has reduced or weakened its claims on the website. Its such a humble, self effacing company.
Website ‘Advertising’ page.
BEFORE ASA complaint:
With 12 years online experience... We have a proven track record on budgets from £99 to £500K, and from 1man operations to Blue chip clients.”
Google: “... we have been market leaders... ”
Why consider us?: “... Our 12 years of online experience ... “
AFTER ASA complaint:
“With 11 years online experience... We have a track record on budgets from £99 upwards, from 1man operations to companies offering national coverage.
Google: “... we have been promoting businesses... ”
Why consider us?: “... Our over 11 years of online experience ...”
As an argument against my statements, what possible relevance does TSMP’s comment have: “probably would have noticed these changes quite some time ago.”?
It doesn’t matter if the changes were this morning, last week, or last month; if they followed the submission of a complaint to ASA, and are the same points made in the complaint, people might reasonably conclude there is a link between the two events.
Based on the claims made in the preceding TSMP post, it would appear that TSMP expects us to believe it spontaneously decided to weaken its website content, in all the same places as a recent ASA complaint identified.
Wow – TSMP really does believe in the Tooth Fairy – and imagines that others do to.
Hi Mr. Faulkner & others,
Our response of you contradicting yourself was based on your statement:
"TSMP feels ASA is really important and influential. That’s why it’s crowing about it.
But it cuts both ways - Following recent complaints to ASA, The Social Media People caved in to ASA’s insistence that false and misleading ‘claims’ are removed or changed."
With an overwhelming emphasis on:
"Following recent complaints to ASA, The Social Media People caved in to ASA’s insistence"
...NOT on any changes made to our website, which, as one of the people who probably views it on a daily basis probably would have noticed these changes quite some time ago. Yet again another twist on facts trying to insinuate there was "ASA insistence" without any knowledge or proof - something it appears you compose most of your comments on. Mistaking your opinion with fact makes you look like a cretin Mr.Faulkner. Please please please, with all your spare time that you appear to have, stop, an take an unbiased check on things. We are NOT a scam, the person who seems to pull your strings like a puppet Steve Jones is a compulsive liar who has never started any legal proceedings out of ethics, they have all been personal reasons because people have pointed out he has very little intelligence. Why would somebody who appears to really care & preach moral obligations work for the company he does, threaten to rape a young girl and be involved in harassment cases with the police. It is plain to see you have formed an opinion and gone that far with it you have lost the original point you are now fixated on trying to point out any mistake made by anybody at TSMP, its OK for us, we will humour you its our job. We get paid to do it. You seem to have no motive apart from Steve Jones pulling your strings. He has also now commented as we write this, in his latest alias "informer28" which it doesn't take genius to ascertain it's him.
Earlier on this page a poster: camilla posed the question:
informer/steve-- a fulcrum is a fixed instrument, it does not swing EVER. you know, you use it with a lever. its sp funny how you try to sound so intelligent, , hahaha but always show how illiterate and uneducated you really are.?
Informer28 responded - DIRECTLY AS STEVE JONES:
camilla4785, or should I say TSMP. A Fulcrum is a static point at which things are usually measured, for example weighing scales.
Am I implying that I am intelligent? Intelligent enough to see through the smoke screen produced by TSMP and all their various logins, like all the pseudo names that they have used on this site e.g bogus solicitors, directors and supposed clients.
That essentially dis-credits everything informer28 has said.
A few choice ones are:
I'm here in the UK, and Steve from Bad Biz is abroad on holiday, Nice to see you back on the Island Steve.
Steve (in his Villa) so he says.
Why should you believe this man to have multiple Id's & logins because it was proved beyond reasonable doubt in the past. Also he has made a comment as "The Social Misfits are ###"
Who became a menber on: Jul 22, 2011 & entered his location as Spain. Coincidence? I think NOT.
http://www.complaintsboard.com/panel.php?action=profile&id=783462
In which he says nasty things and shows his TRUE nasty colours, have a read of his comments:
" you are ###" "its like your on Crack Cocaine or Heroin" also "your nothing more than a drug addict that shags his sister" even "Tom McVey ###ed his sister when she was 12 years old, That makes him a Peadofile you bad little ###er you" and even as far as "Your friend died in vain"
He uses the phrases "you bad little ###er you" and "go and crawl back under the stone you come from" and "Everyone avoid this company like the plague" very obscure insults and terminolgy. His speach pattern & sentance structure is IDENTICAL to Steve Jones.
Have a look at a few of his recent tweets:
@WilmotC There are some complete ###s out there that use the name Wilmot I do notice everyone avoids you like the Plauge 4 followers haha
&
@WilmotC Wanker go back under the stone where you came from.
Again, this chap has so much previous for creating other identities he probably doesnt know who he is.
_________________________________________________________________________________
The only reason this individual being such a ### & and using all these identities is to identify why there is 25 pages on here. Tom Faulkner, who I have never spoken to & have only became acquainted with his comments today I do believe to actually have at least some morals, so it beggars the question?
Why is he agreeing constantly with this ### and recently became an admin on his forum before it was banned? We have our suspicions but are waiting for the police to have the final say.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Also as long as people try to call us a "scam" and unethical we WILL continue to post details of the ASA regulation. Because neutral readers deserve facts not one person pretending to be 12's opinions & lies.
_________________________________________________________________________________
With regret we are forced to expose a few characters for their nasty tendencies, opinions & backgrounds so their wrongful claims against us can be treated with the level of belief they should - NONE AT ALL.
We may be biased in that our organisation has been involved in business 11+ years & is now suddenly wrongfully accused of having no ethics & even "scamming". This has been a hard accusation to face as we are a family business, and our directors have taken a few insults personally and even resorted to defending their integrity themselves. Needless to say it has fell on deaf ears and accusations are constantly thrown in our direction.
We can confirm camilla4785 has no affiliation with us & never has done. He/she seems to know a lot about Steve Jones, we have only had the mis-fortune of meeting him recently (not in person obviously, I don't think he ever leaves the house - unless its to the police station for whatever crimes he is under investigation for)
He has mentioned ex-wife's names & his workplace which we did not know anything about untill it was publicly announced.
We have no personal feelings either way, yes we think there is incredulous people commenting and lying on here, but on the whole we know the truth. So do our expanding clients base.
_________________________________________________________________________________
So, is The Social Media People a scam, are people right to group together to try to ruin the reputation of a company within a an organisation for 11+ years?
Let me provide some EVIDENCE not twisted words or opinions - EVIDENCE.
_________________________________________________________________________________
There was an add set up, the creator was never proven beyond reasonable doubt as the address & contact details did not match up and could have been set up anonymously by anyone. For this reason we will blank the web address, bout the info is readily available from the ASA:
ASA Adjudication on the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk
the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk
Date: 27 July 2011
Media: Internet (search engine)
Sector: Business
Number of complaints: 1
Complaint Ref: A11-154984
Ad
A Google sponsored search ad stated “Social media people scam net66-the social media people AVOID this company is a scam www.the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk.”
Issue
The Social Media People objected that the ad denigrated their business.
Response
www.the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk said the ad was produced by an individual who had worked for The Social Media People. He stated that the claims in the ad were true and that he intended to continue making similar claims on other sites.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA noted that the complainant’s company was called The Social Media People and understood that any consumers searching for ‘Social Media People’ via Google would see the advertisers’ sponsored search ad appear alongside the search engine results. We considered that the ad was alleging that the Social Media People was a company running a scam and because we had not seen evidence to support that claim, we considered that that implication was disparaging to the complainant’s company. We therefore concluded that the ad denigrated The Social Media People.
The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) 3.42 and 3.43 (Imitation and denigration).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form.
_________________________________________________________________________________
I will also quote one of our directors responses in relation to this as it suits our view point perfectly:
I will refer back to the ruling of an ADVERTISING WATCHDOG for people to read & derive their opinions of us not anonymous, malicious & obsessed individuals.
Please read these details:
The ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) Says: "consumers searching for ‘Social Media People’ via Google would see the advertisers’ sponsored search ad appear alongside the search engine results. We considered that the ad was alleging that the Social Media People was a company running a scam and because we had not seen evidence to support that claim"
Who Are The ASA: The ASA is the UK’s independent watchdog committed to maintaining high standards in advertising for the benefit of consumers, advertisers and society at large. Visit this section for an introduction to the ASA, our remit, history and meet our senior team members.
*************************************************************************************************************
If you wish to call us a scam, please don't expect to be believed, complaints are fine, with the amount of customers we have we expect to have unhappy customers, but calling us a scam is different, not ethical & certainly NOT TRUE.
*************************************************************************************************************
We are available for contact For any body who is looking for answers, or is still unsure:
Tel: Tel: [protected]
Email: publicrelations@thesocialmediapeople.co.uk
We are happy to deal with enquiries, and answer any questions or queries you may have.
Regards
Public Relations Team
@ The Social Media People
Seconded!
camilla4785, or should I say TSMP. A Fulcrum is a static point at which things are usually measured, for example weighing scales.
Am I implying that I am intelligent? Intelligent enough to see through the smoke screen produced by TSMP and all their various logins, like all the pseudo names that they have used on this site e.g bogus solicitors, directors and supposed clients.
Now signing on as The Social Media PR department just adds to the illusion that TSMP wishes to project, a large successful pan global organisation. They wish!
Pipe dreams Mr McVey, you are a scammer, and your companies are unethical, unprofessional, with no integrity. You lie about your companies whereabouts, Ignore basic business legislation and even submit false records to Companies House!
Would a legitimate company act in such a manner? I think not, and the vast majority of people who have had the misfortune to have dealings with you and companies feel the same. Why is that?
But hey ho, not to worry you just continue to quote the ASA and ignore the REAL FACTS!
Document relating to previous post:
[protected]: The Social Media People fails to comprehend.
TSMP keeps quoting ASA because it’s the one crumb of defence that they’ve so far found; but it is also a weapon that can be used against them.
By trying to accuse me of breaching confidentiality The Social Media People has tacitly admitted the truth of the statements about ASA disciplining them!
The Social Media People picks up a point to attempt to show that I breached confidentiality.
TSMP quoted my comment:
"Thus quoting the ASA statement (if its true?) breaches that confidentiality. Something not new to the antics displayed by TSMP." It then concluded that my previous post breached confidentiality, with the comment: "His ethics & viewpoints are interchangeable."
What TSMP has failed to take into account is that the report I published was written by me - not ASA. I don't think I can be in breach of confidentiality when publishing my own document. And since, in these circumstances, ASA doesn’t report back to me, I can conclude what happened without revealing what ASA told me – because it didn’t tell me anything! (I explained the process before, but we can’t expect TSMP to have read or understood how it works!)
Further, I only pointed out details of the TSMP website existing just before I sent my report, and a while afterwards. It would be an absolutely amazing coincidence if TSMP had chosen to change exactly the words and phrases complained of within days of the complaint to ASA – but I suppose it's possible - if you also believe in the tooth fairy.
Here's another installment:
TSMP website - ‘Websites’ page.
BEFORE complaint to ASA:
“...one of our qualified designers...”
AFTER complaint to ASA:
“...one of our experienced designers...”
Just the one point on that page, but it shows that TSMP admits it does not have ‘qualified designers’ as it claimed. Perhaps ‘experienced’ equates to ‘work experience’ designers.
I don't have a 'case' just read these posts and you seem to be getting nowhere. Would suggest though that you stop quoting the ASA thing as this seems only to address one of very many issues. Please don't paste it again in response to this I don't think it adds any value or counts for google hits or anything.
Tsmp
Why not simply answer the question from MontyC as from what I can gather it is pretty much what we have all thought.
Hi MontyC,
Can you please reply to the message we have sent so we can investigate your case. We will gladly look into your case if you have an issue or would like to request any further information.
_________________________________________________________________________________
With regret we are forced to expose a few characters for their nasty tendencies, opinions & backgrounds so their wrongful claims against us can be treated with the level of belief they should - NONE AT ALL.
We may be biased in that our organisation has been involved in business 11+ years & is now suddenly wrongfully accused of having no ethics & even "scamming". This has been a hard accusation to face as we are a family business, and our directors have taken a few insults personally and even resorted to defending their integrity themselves. Needless to say it has fell on deaf ears and accusations are constantly thrown in our direction.
_________________________________________________________________________________
So, is The Social Media People a scam, are people right to group together to try to ruin the reputation of a company within a an organisation for 11+ years?
Let me provide some EVIDENCE not twisted words or opinions - EVIDENCE.
_________________________________________________________________________________
There was an add set up, the creator was never proven beyond reasonable doubt as the address & contact details did not match up and could have been set up anonymously by anyone. For this reason we will blank the web address, bout the info is readily available from the ASA:
ASA Adjudication on the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk
the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk
Date: 27 July 2011
Media: Internet (search engine)
Sector: Business
Number of complaints: 1
Complaint Ref: A11-154984
Ad
A Google sponsored search ad stated “Social media people scam net66-the social media people AVOID this company is a scam www.the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk.”
Issue
The Social Media People objected that the ad denigrated their business.
Response
www.the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk said the ad was produced by an individual who had worked for The Social Media People. He stated that the claims in the ad were true and that he intended to continue making similar claims on other sites.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA noted that the complainant’s company was called The Social Media People and understood that any consumers searching for ‘Social Media People’ via Google would see the advertisers’ sponsored search ad appear alongside the search engine results. We considered that the ad was alleging that the Social Media People was a company running a scam and because we had not seen evidence to support that claim, we considered that that implication was disparaging to the complainant’s company. We therefore concluded that the ad denigrated The Social Media People.
The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) 3.42 and 3.43 (Imitation and denigration).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form.
_________________________________________________________________________________
I will also quote one of our directors responses in relation to this as it suits our view point perfectly:
I will refer back to the ruling of an ADVERTISING WATCHDOG for people to read & derive their opinions of us not anonymous, malicious & obsessed individuals.
Please read these details:
The ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) Says: "consumers searching for ‘Social Media People’ via Google would see the advertisers’ sponsored search ad appear alongside the search engine results. We considered that the ad was alleging that the Social Media People was a company running a scam and because we had not seen evidence to support that claim"
Who Are The ASA: The ASA is the UK’s independent watchdog committed to maintaining high standards in advertising for the benefit of consumers, advertisers and society at large. Visit this section for an introduction to the ASA, our remit, history and meet our senior team members.
*************************************************************************************************************
If you wish to call us a scam, please don't expect to be believed, complaints are fine, with the amount of customers we have we expect to have unhappy customers, but calling us a scam is different, not ethical & certainly NOT TRUE.
*************************************************************************************************************
We are available for contact For any body who is looking for answers, or is still unsure:
Tel: Tel: [protected]
Email: publicrelations@thesocialmediapeople.co.uk
We are happy to deal with enquiries, and answer any questions or queries you may have.
Regards
Public Relations Team
@ The Social Media People
All this could be easily avoided.
TSMP When you cold call someone why don't you ask them for their email address if they appear interested in your services.
If you are given the email address send them your terms and conditions outlining exactly what your service is: how long their contract is for and when and how they can cancel. Ask them to email (a tick box) their understanding of what is being contracted and on receipt of that email then telephone them to take their money - for the terms which have or have not been agreed.
This seems a fair and proper way to run a business and would in future prevent many people from entering into a contract without knowing what they were doing, thus resulting probably, in a lot less complaints. Almost every business works in a manner which asks for their customers to acknowledge understanding of what they are undertaking. No contract will ever stand up if the terms have not been agreed. Agreement is not a default from a verbal statement. If people do not like yours T & C's they will not use your company. If they do then fair play.
Good Afternoon All,
Allow us to introduce ourselves, we are the public relations team at The Social Media People.
After months of negative press from individuals, and various comments insulting the integrity & trading practices of the company we will now be responding to GENUINE CUSTOMERS ONLY. If you are scare scaremongering with non-truths & lies it will be drowned out with truth & facts from us.
For Example
Tom Faulkner:
Have a look at his post from just last week:
29-07-2011: The Social Media People breaches confidentiality?
Anyone who has had dealings with ASA knows that when they correspond they require complainents to maintian details of communications as confidential - and not be re-transmitted. Only when what they term 'an Adjudication' is made is the process publicly apparent. Thus quoting the ASA statement (if its true?) breaches that confidentiality. Something not new to the antics displayed by TSMP.
Paired with his recent statements, something doesn't add up about this individual. His ethics & viewpoints are interchangeable. He is also very closely affiliated with Steve BadBiz Jones, who is even more obsessed about trying to ruin our reputation that Mr. Faulkner.
_________________________________________________________________________________
With regret we are forced to expose a few characters for their nasty tendencies, opinions & backgrounds so their wrongful claims against us can be treated with the level of belief they should - NONE AT ALL.
We may be biased in that our organisation has been involved in business 11+ years & is now suddenly wrongfully accused of having no ethics & even "scamming". This has been a hard accusation to face as we are a family business, and our directors have taken a few insults personally and even resorted to defending their integrity themselves. Needless to say it has fell on deaf ears and accusations are constantly thrown in our direction.
_________________________________________________________________________________
So, is The Social Media People a scam, are people right to group together to try to ruin the reputation of a company within a an organisation for 11+ years?
Let me provide some EVIDENCE not twisted words or opinions - EVIDENCE.
_________________________________________________________________________________
There was an add set up, the creator was never proven beyond reasonable doubt as the address & contact details did not match up and could have been set up anonymously by anyone. For this reason we will blank the web address, bout the info is readily available from the ASA:
ASA Adjudication on the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk
the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk
Date: 27 July 2011
Media: Internet (search engine)
Sector: Business
Number of complaints: 1
Complaint Ref: A11-154984
Ad
A Google sponsored search ad stated “Social media people scam net66-the social media people AVOID this company is a scam www.the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk.”
Issue
The Social Media People objected that the ad denigrated their business.
Response
www.the-social-media-people-scam.co.uk said the ad was produced by an individual who had worked for The Social Media People. He stated that the claims in the ad were true and that he intended to continue making similar claims on other sites.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA noted that the complainant’s company was called The Social Media People and understood that any consumers searching for ‘Social Media People’ via Google would see the advertisers’ sponsored search ad appear alongside the search engine results. We considered that the ad was alleging that the Social Media People was a company running a scam and because we had not seen evidence to support that claim, we considered that that implication was disparaging to the complainant’s company. We therefore concluded that the ad denigrated The Social Media People.
The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) 3.42 and 3.43 (Imitation and denigration).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form.
_________________________________________________________________________________
I will also quote one of our directors responses in relation to this as it suits our view point perfectly:
I will refer back to the ruling of an ADVERTISING WATCHDOG for people to read & derive their opinions of us not anonymous, malicious & obsessed individuals.
Please read these details:
The ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) Says: "consumers searching for ‘Social Media People’ via Google would see the advertisers’ sponsored search ad appear alongside the search engine results. We considered that the ad was alleging that the Social Media People was a company running a scam and because we had not seen evidence to support that claim"
Who Are The ASA: The ASA is the UK’s independent watchdog committed to maintaining high standards in advertising for the benefit of consumers, advertisers and society at large. Visit this section for an introduction to the ASA, our remit, history and meet our senior team members.
*************************************************************************************************************
If you wish to call us a scam, please don't expect to be believed, complaints are fine, with the amount of customers we have we expect to have unhappy customers, but calling us a scam is different, not ethical & certainly NOT TRUE.
*************************************************************************************************************
We are available for contact For any body who is looking for answers, or is still unsure:
Tel: Tel: [protected]
Email: publicrelations@thesocialmediapeople.co.uk
We are happy to deal with enquiries, and answer any questions or queries you may have.
Regards
Public Relations Team
@ The Social Media People
Is it possible to have untrue opinions and to also realise that as stated by Tom McVey?
03-08-2011: The Social Media People caves in to ASA.
TSMP has repeatedly told us over the past few days about the ASA being SO important as an arbiter of ‘legal, decent, honest & truthful’ (ASA motto).
Perhaps as angry opponents of The Social Media People scam, our distaste for the recent adjudication can be tempered with a different angle on the ASA.
TSMP feels ASA is really important and influential. That’s why it’s crowing about it.
But it cuts both ways - Following recent complaints to ASA, The Social Media People caved in to ASA’s insistence that false and misleading ‘claims’ are removed or changed.
BEFORE ASA intervention - Website ‘Home’ page - http://thesocialmediapeople.co.uk
“We are market leaders in internet advertising and marketing. ... We can provide a market leading return on investment.
... led the way in the industry from new & groundbreaking SEO tactics to record ROIs on marketing campaigns.
... we have managed over a million ad views on the world's largest social network and have managed over £1m of ads ...”
AFTER ASA intervention - Website ‘Home’ page:
“We specialise in internet advertising and marketing. ... We provide competetive rates of return on investment.
... used the the very latest methods in this fast moving industry utilising new & and exciting SEO tactics to achieve ROIs on marketing campaigns.
... we created advertising on the world's largest social network and have managed succesful ads ...”
Conclusion:
The Social Media People was using misleading and false claims on its website.
(Attached: 1 page from a recent submission to ASA)
As well as grammatical errors, it would appear that Tom McVey also has a problem with English Comprehension, or is it the case 'If I shout loud enough people will listen to me and ignore everybody else'? I wonder if that works in court? Umh!
Yeh! You were right Informer28 - straight back to the single fact they can use the ASA adjudication.
They can't even be bothered to respond to specific points now they've found 'Cut & Paste'.
And - at mid morning today 'Cut & Paste' meant keeping in "Good afternoon..." Maintaining the typical level of accuracy.