i know what you mean, although let's face it, they didn't realise how ugly the situation would eventually get and plus farepak have relied on using every trick in the book from TV commercials to adverts in magazines to lure those poor customers, who were led to believe in the hype.
i feel sympathy for those who had saved up a lot of money and of whom put it into farepak, believing they were going to get a fair deal in the end. though what a bummer that they didn't, and what a bunch of cons, farepak are, eh? a lot of customers were not just let down but they have been treated appallingly. hopefully though, this terrible incident will make people think twice before they consider parting their money with companies like this. particularly those selling hampers, food, etc in the run up to xmas. those which lie to and mistreat their customers should be fined, shut down and put out of business.
2006-11-16 22:01:10
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
"More debt for heartbroken Farepak victims..."
"Farepak boss Sir Clive Thompson now faces having his knighthood removed. He was honoured in 1996 for services to industry...
He is believed to have jetted off on a luxury holiday to escape the furore surrounding the company's demise."
"She warned some could become so desperate they will turn to money lenders and start 2007 in ruinous debt."
"Customers promised the "best family Christmas ever" lost savings of more than £40m..."
"There are no exact figures but insiders suggest £41m - typical savers have lost £400 but some have lost thousands."
I grant that those sorts of schemes (and it is a 'scheme' more than a 'scam') look pretty ridiculous to the landed gentry, but, you're too cold-hearted even for me -- and I can be a _vile_ snob. Really, now...
2006-11-16 06:52:01
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
You've obviously never been short of a bob or too. It's easy to say they should have put it in the bank but other expenses take over and you end up dibbing into your own savings. These people were very sensible to put their money into a saving scheme tailor made for Christmas savings because it helps them spread the cost without the money getting used elsewhere. It's a damn shame this has happened to them. Remember, nobody likes a smart ar*e.
2006-11-16 06:15:46
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The people operating 'Farepak' moved the money from the scheme to fund their other Companies. They should personally have the book thrown at them by the Government - but then they are the same aren't they?
RoyS
2006-11-16 21:36:48
·
answer #4
·
answered by Roy S 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Sadly that is the issue, these people WOULD have been better putting money into a bank but like so many of us, prefer to stash into something we know we can't touch. I think we now have the opportunity to close a loophole and ensure such schemes are regulated as bank schemes in future. Poor comfort for these folk though.
2006-11-16 06:19:51
·
answer #5
·
answered by Graham H 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
Some people find it hard to save when they have control of the account. It's a very good idea but ruined by C U Next Tuesday'S.
2006-11-16 06:17:19
·
answer #6
·
answered by Crazy Diamond 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I agree with Chris S
2006-11-16 06:12:27
·
answer #7
·
answered by Quizard 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I bet alot of people wish they had now but who would have expected them to go bust owing so much.
2006-11-16 06:06:30
·
answer #8
·
answered by richard_beckham2001 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
yes it would, but that would have meant their savings might have affected how much money you could claim on benefits
2006-11-16 06:11:55
·
answer #9
·
answered by Mark J 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
a hamper delivered to your door or carrying heavy shopping bags back from town which do you think is easier?
2006-11-16 06:06:26
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋