RED STRATEGIC CONSULTING LIMITED, REDCOMMS3D, RICHARD DAVIES AND TERRI LUCAS

This story has not yet been rated.

by Grimnian

Facing legal action at the end of June 2017 due to their breaches of contract and the faulty not fit for purpose product the representatives of RedComms3D dissolved their company the following month in July 2017, avoiding legal proceedings. Following this action they deleted all means of contact with their unhappy customers.  They waited and finally brought their own legal action against their customer  as the online complaints continued.  Again my mother insists that she was their main customer as she paid RedComms3D her money. My mother is annoyed and deeply upset that she has been ignored and dismissed by Richard Davies and Terri Lucas, (other than their desire for her to pay their solicitors fees and their claim to her house) My mother again insists that it was her savings of more than 23,000 pounds, left by her late husband that was taken by RedComms3D in return for a faulty, not fit for purpose product and I agree with her, it was!!!!      

Terri Lucas has always strongly denied any connection

to RedComms3D; she states she had no involvement with

the faulty not fit for purpose product or the company. We

question why she feels the need to state this, as the 

representatives of RedComms3D believe that they 

did the best job they could have done for the money

they were paid. If Terri Lucas was ever to be able

to prove no involvement with RedComms3D and the

faulty, not fit for purpose product, would she really be

able to state hand on heart in court that all the actions

taken by the company she believes she had no connetion

with were morally right? That they provided the best

service they could have given? That it was right to take

the products domain name, fail to deliver a functioning 

product, threaten to sue, threaten bailiffs,

threaten police action, try to force others to hack the

Twitter accounts of anyone who complained and

remove their complaints without their permission. 

To take my mothers house after her death if she

would not pay their solicitor fees and attempt to force an

apology through extreme legal coercion from her son,

who was trying desperately to get his elderly mothers

money back.  

   

Hand on heart was this right? Was this truly the right

approach towards customers who were deeply unhappy

with a product? Customers who complained bitterly

online, but were simply blocked and ignored, when they

surely should have been refunded?    

  

© Grimnian 2011

Back

To rate a story please login or sign up as a citizen.