the social media people net66 review: scam 850

The IP, Your IP Tom McVey is 87.194.109.153
Hostname: [protected].bethere.co.uk
I will obtain a Court Order to prove this is your IP address Tom McVey.

I had an idle hour this evening and thought I'd read those fabulous 'Reviews' on TSMP's website.
But when I went to their website I couldn't see the 'link' which previously was in the bar at the bottom. So, it looks like TSMP has taken that down!

Seems they get found out in everything they do Tom.

To summise:
If this whole sordid episode had not, and does not effect honest hard working businesses that it scams money from, this would have made an ideal sketch for the Goons. Sadly this is not the case, which can best described as the the little boy in the playground being caught stealing the other children's dinner money and attempting to divert all attention from himself in the self belief that he is above the law, and a law until himself - A psychotic fate which if checked in time can be cured. However if catalyst, such as cocaine is employed the end result is blatantly made aware.
The pressure Tom McVey is under must be immense!
As we all now know Tom McVey and 'friends ' have been caught with their pants down, and the screams of "liar liar knickers on fire" come pouring out of the voice of the McVey's micro empire.
Some free sound advice Tom, the so called solicitor that you 'employ' is rubbish! No self respecting solicitor would allow one of their clients to make the fundamental errors as you have in your rantings; Or is it the case that, as with a lot of ex cons, they have been recipient of Her Majesty's hotel and have read a few law books? Or is that you!
Your attitude and tactics may impress and work in the questionable 'world' you live in, but you have now entered the adult world where people will and do stand up for their rights, which does not have room for individuals with an amoral attitude.
Enjoy your day in court.

The Social Media People and Fraud. [protected])
This is post ‘1’ in a series of 4 with the same title.

The series describes events concerning a ‘Chargeback’ claim.

The Social Media People and Fraud. [protected])

About 11 days ago Tom McVey sent me a ‘Personal Message’
He posed a cryptic question: Is it fraud to lie to a bank?

At about the same time he also included the same question in one of the posts he’s now had removed.
You can see from a couple of my own posts that I promised to answer the question. (That was about 9 & 10 days ago, 22/23 June)

So - will I answer his question, “Is it fraud to lie to a bank?. Of course I will.
Unlike Tom McVey I have nothing to hide in this affair.

The answer, in the context of his question, is: YES.

The Social Media People and Fraud. [protected]).

2 days ago he sent me another ‘Personal Message’, which revealed his reasoning behind the original, cryptic, question.
It reads:
“Hi Tom,
Thank you so very much for you well known useless feedback & lies again.
If you are willing to post everything, why have you not mentioned you have LIED to your card company to try to claim back money you spent with us.
Now that is an actual offense, not just your general speculation & edited documents.
Hopefully speak soon, if you gave a genuine request as to why you think you were mis-treated in stead of constant allegations we may have had a chance to assist you with a query.
Extremely Kind Regards
Tom”

We can see that Tom McVey was aware that I’d submitted a ‘Chargeback’ claim to my bank (for ‘Non-Delivery of Service’); the bank had asked TSMP for its side to the story, and he wanted to ‘have a dig’ at me. I imagine he was a bit annoyed.

The Social Media People and Fraud. [protected]):

Where does all that background lead us?
Note that the only thing available to me in making a ‘Chargeback’ was my simple, but truthful assurance to the bank that:
1. I had not seen the adverts.
2. No-one else had seen the adverts.
3. There was no response to the adverts (website hits, nor enquiries).
4. TSMP had provided no independent, verifiable evidence that the adverts had appeared. (TSMP’s ‘Report’ is produced in house, by themselves. I provided a copy to the bank.)

When the bank approached TSMP it could call on all the expert staff and resources of long established, highly respected, major, big company to assemble and present its case.
It also had all the documentation, accounts and correspondence with Facebook etc, to prove its position.

What was the outcome?
The bank came down in my favour. The bank believed me.
I got my money back.

So who lied?

Has anyone notice that nearly everytime Tom Mcvey uses the term liars he puts in in capitals don't you remember some other abusive low life in here with a name that had liars in capitals - namely "I will expose you ALL - LIARS". Its funny that the phsyce of these two people seem remarkably similar in as such that they are both obsessed with spelling liars in capitals. The other obsevation I have is that Tom Mcvey also appears to be just as illiterate as Steve Jackson and like Steve Jackson signs off with the same meaningnless smarm. If I was a psychiatrist I might easily reach the conclusion that Tom Mcvey was a narcissist with a multi personality disorder. He's also going to be £40, 000 worse off very soon! Tick Tock McVey time is running out!

Perhaps he puts 'liars' in capitals because it's one of the few words he can spell.
Perhaps one day, in addition to being able to spell 'liars', he'll understand the meaning of the word. (But I won't hold my breath!)

This forum is very entertaining.

Well, perhaps I should introduce myself. I am an investor in various listed companies - small or medium in size. The small companies are often very risky because of the people running them. You have to be very selective when investing in shares. Little regulation and directors paying themselves huge salaries to sit on their backsides all day is a recipe for disaster.

Anyway - the reason I am interested in this is because I am a contribitor to Bad Biz. The site that has had some criticism here from the Social Media People. Now, I have come across a few examples of where directors of companies have spent some their working day posting on bulletin boards. To be honest if a director or company is being unfairly criticised then they are entitled to defend themselves. The problem with the examples I have seen in the past is that the directors were posting under various user ID's talking up their companies and hence the share price. No one knew who they were and eventually the companies concerned failed and shareholders lost their money.

Only later did it emerge that they had been trying to increase the share price by talking up the share. I think one would describe that as a form of market abuse. And every minute they were posting they were not running the comapny.

Anyway the point I am going to make regarding this situation is that Tom Mcvey/Steven Jackson are spending quite alot of time here. Fair enough in some ways. But I really do think unless they can post something which shows that their critics are wrong they should get on with running their business. I am also intrigued at the names mentioned - Tom Mcvey, Steven Jackson and Jonathon Barker Smith.

Who are these people?

Has a deception in this respect taken place?

And before I am accused of being biased I honestly do want to hear what the Social Media People have to say. I give everyone a fair hearing. If they can provide evidence to refute the allegations I am sure everyone will apologise.

Over to you Tom/Steve.

Hi BadBiz 2 you do know that Tom McVey is without doubt going to say we are the same person, I do notice in eariler posts by this company "Already Highlighted In A Lawsuit" That they state that you're are another person, ( I wonder what ID he is saying you are) he obviously does this to fish to see who you are.

When we go to court, I request you attend and even give evidence so I can simply put that scenario to bed very quickly.

The Proof of who Steven Jackson & Johnathon Barker Smith are on the other hand will be revealed in the court room. NO SHOW they lose as simple as that. But the mega empire of the McVeys will be able to handle that they cliam to have 12, 000 happy customers = £1, 188, 000 per month and staff of 614 all in the London Office (Virtutal Office) We know by way of a Mr S**** P****** that they pretend to be in London, yet even Steven Jackson's ID on here puts him in Manchester. SEE ATTACHED IMAGE

From my business experience and looking through the numbers on issued invoices there turnover is appoximatly £34, 000 a month. calculated at this the staff level would be around ten members including management. Taking Directors income out of the company there will be little left in the way of profit.

This type of business is set to run until the big boys come in and remove them out of the game (See the Google Scenario) I.e. Matchmaker all of a sudden they're gone leaving small one man operating businesses out in the cold with money wasted.

Added to this from the time this thread on here started I don't think they have answered one of the question directed at them about their business and its intentions all they do is say genuine cleint's contact them and everyone else is the same person posting over and over again and that they are liars.

I think one of the main issues here is Tom McVey's lack of self control. You could excuse a young man of this type of behaviour but we are talking about a Company Director who should act with some reponsibility.

I do not need to say anything about what he, his family (Involved In Business) & The Business Empire they think they have. As he says it all for himself. Would anyone want to deal with a company whose director goes on the Internet and says such things to his client base? (No I'm not a Client) But apparently all Tom McVeys clients are liars

Ironically a lot of the previous posts get pulled from here & Ironically they are the "Steven Jackson" ones, I wonder why that is happening? I wonder if Steven Jackson (Is taking a back seat on things) As he knows he now as to prepare for a lawsuit.

Doing some research through the court websites it appears that there is a possible, CCJ issued against Net 66. I have not found out what this is about yet but I am sure this information will be revealed shortly.

Tom McVey actually sent an email to my No Reply Email Address. concluding that he acts for both The Social Network Marketing Company Ltd trading as The Social Media People and Net 66 Web Services Ltd The contents of this email will be revealed in the court room and prove the intentions of this person and what he writes.

I will answer one of Tom McVeys questions though No I am not Homophobic and to be perfectly honest with you I don't mind you going around kissing other men.

As other members on here that do know me on here and due to the Court Case Scenario Against Tom McVey, Neil McVey, Steven Jackson, Johnathon Barker Smith Network Marketing Company Ltd trading as The Social Media People and Net 66 Web Services Ltd we wil see what happens

Ironically for anyone who as paid this company, The contract that they say is a rolling contract For The Social Network Marketing Company Ltd trading as The Social Media People, check your bank statements as apparently you have been billed by Net 66 Web Services Ltd who you have not agreed any contract with. My suggestion is approach your bank with this information. Anyone of you that have paid on a credit card claim it back under section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 as the bank will come under equal liability.

In relation to the type of advertising that The Social Media People sell is impressions only. They pay only pennies for this (If done at all) click throughs are a completly different story and can be monitored if you install Google Analyctics on your website.

In regards to this post this is my final post on this website and anything else I say will be restricted to my website only. For anyone else that website is http://badbizforum.com If you are an approved member you can post on their.

Morning,

Unfortunately, we are left in a position where he have to reply yet again. Some of the allegations made have been laughable.

If anybody looks at some of my latest posts & that of Steve Jones & co. what is very plain to see is that www.badbizforum.co.uk is ran by an individual who has a track record of pretending to be other people to comment on how good he is & how bad everybody else is. This proves he is not to be trusted & is an out & out liar.
I have previously speculated that this individual was probably 99% of the lies on this forum & the recent evidence that proves his sly, lying character probably indicate that our suspicions were correct.

Any potential clients please contact us for GENUINE reviews as opposed to lies written by people who are proven liars.

We have suffered multiple personal insults & some very strong insinuations against our ethics, now this vicious individual is proven to be the liar that he is, hopefully by the response we are getting from existing & potential clients, everybody else can see what lies have been told about us.

Kind Regards

Tom McVey

Tom McVey refers to 'many allegations made have been laughable.'

Maybe - but many, many more are serious, true and demonstrate that his Rogue Trader company - The Social Media People - has:
No good business practices, no honesty, no integrity, no ethics, no idea.

Look at the published TSMP documents (on this site and others) which prove the company is either inefficient or deceitful - or both.

Tom McVey sneered at me for publishing edited versions of his company's documents (to protect identity of customers from his bullying and threats) - and yet THE ONLY documents Tom McVey has published - ARE EDITED.

He can't have it both ways. His company, like his company's documentation - is rubbish.

And he has still failed to answer even the one question posed recently - despite the fact that his own questions were answered by me.
So - NO HONOUR either!

And of course - by criticising the 'edited documents' published by me, he acknowledges he has seen/read them, and that they are also 'real documents'

But he can't bare to explain the multitiude of anomalies, errors, etc. contained in the genuine, rubbish documents, produced by his rubbish company.

Tom McVey,

I am very disappointed that you do not seem to want to reply to my posts but concentrate on rubbishing badbiz.
Why have you never answered our complaints in any way? Before Steve Jones even came on the scene you were the same. why have you hidden behind so many aliases. Why have you given false addresses for you businesses - which you have stopped doing now. Why, why why?

Where the above to be true, and I can only go on the experience I have received from the 'McVey consortium', why is it that Tom McVey has used duel identities on this forum?

Also why is it that TSMP claim to be working from a location in London, when all evidence firmly places their operation actively working in Manchester?

If I were to be naive, I would suggest this is to divert any adverse visits from disgruntled customers. Tom McVey obviously has a good reason for doing so, I am sure, so why doesn't he give a brief explanation to alleviate any concerns people have about his business? A simple solution to an extended thread; and at the same time answer all the other questions that people may have about his business? Surely Tom is proud of his business ethics and wants to publise that to all and sundry? Any reputable company would, wouldn't they?

Yes, any reputable company would. But The Social Media People hasn't.

I don't think Informer28 would be naive to think what he writes above. But keep in mind that in addition to disgruntled customers, a 'hidden address' also makes it difficult for bodies like Trading Standards to be properly advised and act.

The VAT people should have no difficulty because The Social Media People (The Social Network marketing Company Ltd.) recorded Portugal Street East, Manchester M1 2wx as their operational address.

The intent, I am adamant, is to create a smoke screen and avert attention from their other business Nett66 which I am led to believe also has issues on delivery as all related companies are managed (albeit badly!) by the same people - hence the continual use of pseudo-names.
It will be entertaining when all of them have to make an appearance at The Queens Bench, it will be a comedy of errors with all the costume changes that Tom McVey has to make!
Ignorance is not a defense, but perhaps TSMP are unaware of that, the pages relating to that in the 'Everyman's easy guide to Law' must be missing! The old adage '...the best form of defense is attack...' is misplaced.
Lest we not forget, Tom Mcvey, is not exactly the most eloquent of writers and his comprehension of English literature is blatantly poor. Hence the inability to grasp the gist of basic questions.

Informer28:
It's an interesting concept; perhaps a new interpretation of law, which could be considered by a barrister acting for The Social Media People + its Directors.

"My Lord, It is established that gnorance of the law is not a defence ( a fact of which most people are aware).
But, Your Honour, my clients were ignorant of the fact - that ignorance of the law is not a defence.
I put it to the court that the defendants can not be held responsible.

I think the barrister would need to be very well paid to try such an arguement.

Net66 does indeed have its own 'skeletons in the cupboard', but the indesputable links between the two companies (+ The Social Media People Ltd.) gives it a degree of bad exposure here. Once TSMP has been attended to perhaps Net66 Web Services Ltd. will be more in the spotlight. After all, it also deserves its 15 miuntes of fame.

How truer words can be!

Tom McVey: As you continue to libel me on here you leave me no alternative but to defend myself yet again. It’s almost funny how you keep saying you’ve proved something when you haven’t proved anything and quite simply look at the comments no-one even believes you one bit.

As you keep saying you’ve proved me as a liar why don’t you respond to the Pre-Action notice I sent you? You can attempt to prove that I am a liar in a court of law that is my choice and I am certainly going to take the opportunity.

You’re supposed to be this big-shot business man but I think and I know a lot of lawyers agree your fingers are going to get seriously burnt on this one.

The Pre-Action notice gave you the opportunity to defend yourselves or to sort out the scenario in a proper legal setting. You would much prefer to continue to Libel me, that’s fine though as all your doing is building a bigger case against yourself.

The only burden of proof will be when the Jury finds you guilty of Libel in the largest degree.

I wonder what legal firm will even want to represent you and your outfit. That's if you can afford one. You could always remortgage your homes etc.
Good luck is all I can say.

Hey Tom McVey Was Rachel Elnaugh one of those genuine reviews or was that just a fabricated on your website?

I have just read the last few posts of Tom McVey and despite his continued presence here he has not answered a single question put to him.

Tom - are you going to answer these questions?

If you had a defence or a successful argument to disprove what has been said - no doubt you would have used it by now.

Readers and customers will therefore draw their own conclusions about this failure and your continued attacks on others to divert attention from the issues this forum is concerned with.

It's not just me asking questions of The Social Media People and its scam.
Everyones questions are repeatedly and contiuously ignored and dodged by the company.

When I recently (on 5 July 2011 that was 4 days and 2 days ago) answered the questions posed to me, I proposed that as a matter of honour and fair play Tom McVey answer a single question in return. But he hasn't - yet. Let's give him another opportunity.

The question is: What is the name, and Firm, of the solicitor who The Social Media People had telephone me on 5 April 2011, and which conversation was confirmed by your esteemed Director of Customer Service, Steven Jackson in his telephone message to me on 20 April 2011?
Listen to this recording as 'Exhibit 1' - YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNDvXf1jcqM

Over to you Tom; if you want everyone to believe you are the honourable, upright businessman you claim to be, you should answer a question posed by a customer, about a real event, and supported by evidence from your very own spokesman. What do you say?

05-07-2011: Reporting a Fraud.

It is worth reminding people, or informing new viewers on Complaintsboard.com -
If anyone believes that a fraud has been committed there is a new government website to centralise the reporting of frauds and then for allocation to the appropriate Police force or investigation authority.

http://www.actionfraud.org.uk/ Telephone: [protected]

Also consider: Consumer Direct, Trading Standards, The Advertising Standards Authority, Companies House, ALL your own contacts and professional bodies & trade associations, TV and radio programmes (like Watchdog, Rogue Traders, You and Yours, Rip-off Britain etc), Manchester Evening News.

As mentioned on many many occasions, I invite, if not urge, any genuine customers to get in contact with us if they do ever encounter any problems at all, or even any general questions. We have provided a good level of customer service throughout our time in business in all of our ventures as an organisation. This will continue to be the case indefinitely.

We have an absolute mountain of evidence that is being compiled against Steve BadBiz Jones Winterbourne Debt Addiction Buy-pal AKA sksbcm also various other aliases, too much to list as we have a business to run. There HAS been libel committed, but only by this multiple identity compulsive liar. If a genuine court case is initiated we will be delighted to comply & undoubtedly win. Also we have no record of anyone EVER logging in as the offender the alleged "case" is aimed at. There has been a claim made, but no proof who has made it, in one breath this individual says there is NO IP info on complaints board, in the next he is making allegations that he will take someone to the high court based on info gained from this so-called non existent & unavailable info. I for one am confused. Would a high court believe someone who has this much inconsistencies in what they say & do?

Regardless, and to be frank, we do not care about these allegations & the various other profiles set up by this individual on here full of lies about our trading practices. All we care about is our business, and that our customers continue to get the good return on investment we have traditionally provided, and also to carry on to provide new & innovative products.
This has kept our organisation in business over 12 years & will do for a lot longer.

This is what matters, and we have and will maintain our high levels of customer service, every client we have has a personal account manager so there would not be a valid reason to comment on here unless you are purposely trying to put people off from doing business with us. We have a proven track record & many honest & genuine reviews for prospective clients.

I would love to spend more time speaking to clients & assisting with queries as apposed to responding to blatant lies about our integrity on here. These liars have no respect for the law and seem to believe in character assassination with lies but seem to categorically ignore the proof that proves them to be dis-honest and liars.

Again, if there is any of our genuine customers on here, please do not get hesitate to get in contact via a personal message or contact our office direct via account manager.

Kind Regards
Tom McVey

Thanks Tom Faulkner for yet more lies.

You did not answer the question posed, I refuse to make personal and as for: "if you want everyone to believe you are the honorable, upright businessman you claim to be, you should answer a question posed by a customer"

This website is mainly you & Steve Jones pretending to be other people making up lies & allegations. We have seen your incredulous nature and have decided that trying to reason with you is an impossible task.

There was purpose to the question, I KNOW you have seen "sksbcm" "converse" with Steve Jones on his forum. From all the pictures posted and a simple search of sksbcm on google you can see beyond reasonable doubt that it IS Steve Jones.
I wanted to see weather you would also and say either: it's not Steve OR you didn't see it. You seem to class yourself as honest, I wanted to see whats more important to, proving your integrity whilst proving Steve Jones to be a liar, OR lying yourself to cover for him?

Kind Regards
Tom McVey

Tom
If you were polite and courteous, non aggressive and did not display personal insults and about individuals; Then perhaps people would take you seriously as a professional businessman.

The reason why individuals, myself included, have subscribed to this form of address is because we have been recipient of your 'customer care' and are disgusted at the way you conduct your business, which has little regard for anybody other than yourselves!

Your customer care appears to be non existent to a very large number of people, hence the reason individuals vent their frustration and views on this and other notice boards.

You could have easily put the issue to bed by simply answering the basic questions that have been put of you, in a polite controlled manner - You haven't and you wonder why somebody is taking you, your associates and your company to court. You say you don't care, a responsible and caring 'family' run company with high moral standards would and be more concerned about the issues being raised by ex clients; not abusing reporters of your business activity.

Your behavior overall has resulted in your company being reported to all the appropriate authorities and the ensuing court action - You only have yourself to blame.

Informer, as I have said if your a genuine customer I want if not urge you to get in contact.
However, judging by the way you have structured your comment, it is not looking for a solution.
If you are a genuine customer please mail me, along with your customer ID & query & I will do everything possible to help.
The reason I have retaliated to being called a crook, a liar & had both my family mocked & my business practices with passion and strong protest is there has been 2 people who have made up many identities, called themselves at least 10 user names on here - lied, rang my office & threatened to sexually force themselves on a young girl.
This is unacceptable & will soon all be aired. The reason why I haven't answered their questions is they don't deserve it.
The level of conduct is absolutely sickening, laughing & mocking someone with a disability & then threatening to sexually force yourself on s a young girl & mocking somebody because they might be gay pretty much proves the low low level of decorum shown. We have responded on their forum but have be3en barred everyday a new "customer" makes a similar allegation with very very similar grammatical tenancies.
We are the victims in this & I can categorically confirm that these allegations that we will be "taken to court" are some of the most ridiculous I have seen in my life. The only thing is when we win & are owed money by badbiz, they will not be able to afford it & not post the info on their website, as we have proven when you make them look stupid they delete it.

Again if you are a genuine customer I will help as much as physically possible to ensure our high level of customer satisfaction is kept up in your case also.

Kind Regards
Tom McVey

Even if Tom McVey doesn't wish to answer a question to satisfy me, you'd think he might wish to explain to other readers as to why a fake solicitor telephoned me on behalf of his company. After all his 'Director - Steven Jackson' - confirmed the contact in his telephone message.

Why would a reputable company phone and pretend to be a solicitor, if not to intimidate someone?
In this earlier case The Social Media People was trying to silence my criticism of them regarding their false claims about 'Blue Chip Clients' which appeared on their website.
Now they still attempt to quash valid, proveable, criticism with their pathetic smokescreen of diversionary tactics.

Once again:
The question is: What is the name, and Firm, of the solicitor who The Social Media People had telephone me on 5 April 2011, and which conversation was confirmed by your esteemed Director of Customer Service, Steven Jackson in his telephone message to me on 20 April 2011?
Listen to this recording as 'Exhibit 1' -

YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNDvXf1jcqM

How can I be so sure that the 'solicitor' caller, phoning and announcing himself as calling on behalf of The Social Media People (AND having the confirmation a few days later from 'Customer Service Director, Steven Jackson' of that call) - was NOT A SOLICITOR?

1. If a genuine solicitor calls and is asked for his/her 'SRA number' (the official registration with Solicitors Regulation Authority) the solicitor MUST give that number. The 'fake' solicitor employed by The Social Media People did not provide that number.
2. The Firm the fake 'solicitor' named does not exist.
3. The fake 'solicitor' failed to send the letter which was promised. (Over 3 months ago now.)
4. The Social Media People has repeatedly refused to indentify the fake 'solicitor' - both in public, but also in private during a telephone converstation between me and the (also fake) Steven Jackson. (The telephone conversation is recorded.)

Tom McVey you obviously do not have a clue about law. I should check out the CPR for libel if I were you. Again Tom McVey tries to twist things against other people rather than answering your customers questions posed to you time an time again.

You think your going to win in court, Good luck. That and the tons of other evidence I have its going to be interesting. The evidence I have speaks for itself and is not posted anywhere.
One thing more you need to think back to is the email you sent my No Reply email address. very amusing you probably thought it was. I found it rather interesting.

I would check with your Solicitor Jonathon Barker Smith or your legal department run by Grace about Pre-Action notice as she will know exactly what I am referring to.

Good luck when you and everyone else in your family has to file bankruptcy.

http://badbizforum.com

Tom McVey

Did you get the Police involved when '...rang my office & threatened to sexually force themselves on a young girl..' ? They would have investigated it properly, possibly listened to your recording facility (which all reputable 'telesales operation' have) obtained the telephone number regardless if it was blocked to your phone, location and who it was registered to; prosecuted accordingly at such a vile incident. Did you manage to get an incident reference number from them and has the individual been arrested and charged?

All the above are very simple questions which would not harm your companies integrity but would assist in validating your situation and claim of being a reputable company (duty of care to their staff).

Failure to have done so leaves your claim as hearsay, and of no credence or value what so ever, other than trying to achieve the sympathy vote'; which I am sure is not your intention, is it?

If you can explain why you take monies from individuals under the umbrella of 'rolling contracts' when they are not contracted to The Social Media People it will make your case as a reputable family business clear and totally transparent, something which is very much lacking to date, especially with the 'home' produced reports of 'clicks' as opposed to the impressions that are claimed to have occurred.

Am I disgruntled? Yes

Am I prepared to engage with your company again directly and resolve any issues that I may have, and receive the atrocious verbal abuse and subliminal threats again? I think not - Once bitten twice shy!

However, I am more than happy to explain my own personal atrocious experience with your company to an independent third party, and let them make an unbiased conclusion. If the outcome proves that I have misconstrued events, then I will happily withdraw and apologies accordingly, Is the same true of yourself?

Tom McVey the victim to funny and now suggests he is gay. I may add that I never suggested that you were gay. You posted mine and my wife's picture on this very forum. You just did not like the fact that I returned the favour with the picture of you kissing another guy. What I was stating is true. The picture shows you kissing a guy so it stands an extremely good chance and is highly likely that you like kissing guys. I may add that I have no problems with gay people at all. But I do have problems with people that cheat people, lie to people and threaten people.

So now you've had two people call your office and threaten your staff and now your the victim. First of all what you state is absolutely un-factual.

Do we need to play the game of recordings? You know the ones where you threaten people Tom and where you pretend to be other people like Solicitors and Police Officers. There is plenty more where they comes from Tom McVey.

I gave you a chance of being on BadBiz Forum to air your side of things but instead, you accused people of grave crimes and then tried to say I was stupid and knew nothing about SEO. that’s why my website www.badbiz.co.uk ranks in Google a lot higher than your website.

The only person that looks stupid is *** ***** just like he does with the rest of his ridiculous posts.

I hope you get a good law firm McVey as you will need their help big time

It's now time to start taking a look at your other websites Perhaps Net 66 Web Services Ltd should be my first port of call. Considering you sell websites and Google page rank and Printing lol Printing has anyone seen The Social Media Peoples invoices, they came from the same people that sell printing. and err website templates.

Bring your so called evidence to court, where as I stated we will let the Judge make the decision on who the liar is and who is not. Don't forget I hope you notified the imaginary callers that you were recording the calls, as there are a couple of laws in their that you have to adhear to especially being a company. Damn I forgot there is one set of laws for everyone and another set for you and your company Tom.

Whoever loses the case can pay the damages, Tom if I lose based on the clear cut evidence that I have and good people as witnesses (Those Witnesses you keep saying are me) Then I would be man enough to pay you.,
but based on that I would expect the same in return so lets put it on the line Tom if you lose will you pay or will I as I can imagine have to chase the money. Just to let you know If there is any problem of getting the compensation you wont have to worry about the Bailiffs turning up, I have one better than that, its called the Official Receiver.

As I said and will keep saying I will rest my case in the court room.

That idea that informer 28 had sounds like it is worth looking at.
If the company would agree to an independant party hearing both sides of the story I would be willing to come forward to put my side.
So far I am not willing to say who I am because of all the bad things that have been said when some people do, but I think it would be better if people could be sure that if they presented their own case in their real name it would be better all round.
I belive Im right, and the company thinks its right and unless someone can decide, there wont be an agreement.
Id ask the company then - if a way can be found to do this, would they be willing to put their side and stick by the outcome?

Morning,

I would invite, if not URGE anybody to contact me direct. I have made this request before as we are very keen to resolve any issues or mis-understandings. This has repeatedly been offered to all customers. There are a few people spreading speculation but if you read the comments & intentions its not about the business practice it seems to be personal vendetta;s from the person who constantly pretends to be other people on his own forum & on others reviewing his own work.
We didnt get to where we are by being dis-honest and we are more than keen to sort out issues with customers, if there are any genuine customer issues that is.

With regards to BadBiz we're all a bit bored of your allegations & we are investing YOU. So are the Police & soon so will the ASA as the claims on your own websites are nothing short of laughable. If you have the money to take us to court I would love to prove to everybody that we are the victim.
Why mention laws about calls being recorded? are you scared of them being used and your true colours being shown?
I can inform you, with extreme delight, they are all compliant with the law as is all of our practices.
I would be happy to publicize the case to prove this vicious individual is trying to spread lies about our companies, he has threatened to sexually force himself on our receptionist, laughed at a staff member due to a physical problem insinuated that being gay is to be laughed repeatedly, the phrase "funny and now suggests he is gay" is despicable. What a low horrible dis-respectful human being.
The only reason a picture was posted was to prove he used the name sksbcm. He also used it on his forum pretending to be someone else. To anybody that is beyond reasonable doubt. As Karen (his wife) uses kssbcm.
So: Steve = sksbcm. Karen = kssbcm. Have a look on his forum, his youtube channel, everything. He may be able to get someone to pretend its their profile, but anybody who's eyes & brain works can see the truth clear as day.
Also on the profile I posted: www.stumbleupon.com/stumbler/sksbcm/reviews it is beyond any reasonable doubt & without prejudice that anybody can conclude this individual is not only a liar, but uses alias's to make his arguments look more feasible & his opinions look as if they are worth listening to.
If anybody is still not convinced we are the victim of an unstable, compulsive lying, multiple identity commenter please bare this in mind. If you read what he wrote:
"Steven you claimed in your phone message to someone you used an IP tracking website that is not an IP tracking website"
Source: www.badbizforum.co.uk
He directs a claim at our company, yet in his "lawsuit" details can be publicly found at: http://badbiz.co.uk/2011/06/the-social-media-people-getting-sued-by-badbiz/
He claims to instigate proceedings:
1. Please take note that on the 14th June 2011 on a website called Complaints Board with the domain name http://www.complaintsboard.com on the link the social media people net66 — scam Under the nom de plume (Handle) of I will expose you ALL – LIARS You posted false and defamatory comments about me & one of my businesses that are libelous.

and goes on...

3. Evidence provided that the IP (Internet Protocol) address of 87.194.109.153 on the system of [protected].bethere.co.uk I am of the understanding that this is your IP address. But if you refuse to acknowledge this, I am willing to apply to the courts for a Norwich Pharmacal Order.

So, he claimed we could'nt possibly prove who has posted comments on complaints board because of IP tracking. He seemed to be very sure of this, yet, when it suits him, all of a sudden he can access the info?

Anybody else smell a rat?
Paired with proof he has added new alias's on his forum to agree with his points & make them look believable, he HAS done it on here. You will notice a pattern, he logs onto forums under a different name, tells them about this magical forum & then the person who invites them disappears.
If I had any advice for Mr. Jones it would be, GET A JOB!
Stop calling every company a scam! We are in talks with advertisers on your site, to remove their ads as you undoubtedly will turn on them.
In business, and in life, when your dealing with 10, 000+ customers/people there will be discrepancies and mis-understandings. Its a fact. Its not a scam, its just when your selling a service, people will speak to people who they are not compatible with and disagree. Its a fact. Surely scam companies scam everyone dont they?
BadBiz himself speculated he thought we had a £34, 000 monthly turn around, our product is £99 so that's approx 340 clients a month(according to BadBiz speculation) So where are all these "scam" complaints?
Have a look at ALL companies who provide service's. from yell.com, all the banks, most car insurance companies, many car companies, many media companies & telephone providers.
An amalgamation of mix up's due to thousands & thousands of clients, and, well, lets just say challenging people, there is always allegations of scam fraud this that whatever.
Its a fact of business & life. Every single person reading this forum will know at LEAST 1 person they know who loves to complain, moan and literally winge about everything, and if you dont - ITS YOU!

It is a pain to come on here to defend our integrity daily, but purely out of principal I can not leave alone. We will continue to defend our honour & prove we care about customers and have moved our business forward for over a decade with passion, belief & ethics. Its easy for somebody with no job who sites in their bedroom all day commenting on their own forums to start the allegation: scam scam. But in reality, if this guy knew what he was doing/saying he wouldn't have to pretend to be other people on his forum to back up his points. PLUS he may be a registered company & not some body with a hobby. Like "hobby horse" yet another alias we believe, he seems to comment everywhere alerting people to the marvelous nature of badbiz.
The reason to go on so much about this individual so much is we believe he is responsible for 99% of the comments on here & to prove the cap fits I have produced some evidence. I have evidence ranging from harassment, threats to rape & physical violence to come about this individual. Rest assured the truth will prevail in court if we ever get there & you will all see a written apology from this individual.

Anyway, away from deluded people & twisted allegations:
If anybody is unhappy with the service they received from us please either message me direst through here, email through the website or simply get in contact. I will not pretend that 100% of customer are happy 100% of the time. Thats physically impossible (unless you own a forum & you can delete people who make you look stupid)
But what I can GUARANTEE is we give 100% effort to 100% of our clients to ensure their experience with us is profitable, amicable and successful.
We have a passion for advertising, and whilst advertising is never a guarantee of gaining new business, we guarantee to give the best possible opportunity for any of our campaigns to work.
If we were a "scam" why not sign people up for 12months, or for more than £99.
It just wouldn't work. We offer clients a chance to try our service out. We confident in our abilities & after reading this statement, you can see our passion & willingness to endeavor to provide the best service physically possible.

If you are not a client & wish to learn more about us get in contact. Please do NOT take comments on here at face value as if you look at the evidence its like taking asking Pinocchio for the truth.

Kind Regards
Tom McVey

Now that The Social Media People introduces the concept of Pinnochio may I ask the Managing Director of The Social Media People why claimed to have 2 different birthdays?

Like many people, I have one Date of Birth.
I think the Queen has two, but that she is regarded as a special case.

How ‘Special’ is the Managing Director of The Social Media People? And how much has his nose grown?

Tom McVey,

'Fess up for God's sake.
' If we were a "scam" why not sign people up for 12months, or for more than £99. '
But that's exactly what you did do on your Net66 'business, didn't you. It seems that many of the punters who you took on there felt it was a scam.

The word scam doesn't mean you have to approach everyone, it just means that by deception, fraud, a confidence trick or similar you intentionally deprive someone of their money. Does this ring any bells.
Particularly when there is no verification that you have provided a service. We all know about the vagaries of advertising and again you are being rather stupid to think that we don't but this is what you imply - that we don't understand. Us usually there is a way of seeing your advert in action. with the Social Media People there is no way to do this. As you seem to be so reluctant to help us, and I think you are lying threugh your teeth when you say genuine customers can contact you to seek help, you will forgive us for believing you are a con merchant.
You are not denying that are you.