SMBS/Lordship Lane - Great Shop!

[Sue]

Anything is "possible", of course. But I don't think your "possibility" is particularly likely, no.

Somebody "doing fruit and veg all day" should not be looking at the customers' fruit and veg and just guessing what to charge for it, when there are scales next to him.

The correct charge for the ginger was something like 34p, ie nothing like 60p. I can't remember exactly, but it was a very small piece of ginger.

I'm spending time and energy because people keep posting about it, so I'm responding. I would rather not be spending time on it!

I said many posts ago that I'd like to leave it there, but others seem unwilling to do so, therefore we are just going round in circles.

I have said what happened. I don't know why other people - who were not there - are also spending so much time and energy on this.

As I have already said, only the person concerned knows what he did or didn't intend. Only one other person saw what happened, who was the man behind me in the queue.

[bob]

I have used SMB for more than 30 years this is not in response to all the rants and raves just my personal view. They have all ways been very helpful and polite and I will continue to use them.

Bob S

[StraferJack]

Anyone know if "The goose is out" still advertise gigs in SMBS?

I'm guessing that means being nice to the staff to their face whilst posting stuff like this on here

Worth bearing in mind

[standswithfist]

I've been using them for 17 years and i LOVE them. Like the stuff they stock, love their fruit and veg, love their fridge/freezer stuff and would now ALWAYS give them the benefit of the doubt.

[Sue]

StraferJack Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Anyone know if "The goose is out" still advertise

> gigs in SMBS?

>

> I'm guessing that means being nice to the staff to

> their face whilst posting stuff like this on here

>

> Worth bearing in mind

xxxxx

As I said above, I no longer go into the shop. Which is a pity, as I like the things they sell. Therefore there is no question of my "being nice to the staff to their face", despite your nasty implication, Strafer Jack.

I am not a hypocrite, and anything I post on here is clearly under my own name, unlike the vast majority of people on this forum who are free to insult others whilst hiding behind their pseudonyms. As I post threads about the Goose, I imagine anybody who reads them is well aware who I am.

The other half of The Goose Is Out! puts all the posters up locally, was not with me at the time of the incident in question, and has nothing whatever to do with this. I imagine that he has a perfectly good relationship with the staff, as he does with most people.

ETA: And after what has happened on this thread, I imagine nobody in their right mind would dare to ever post on this forum again if they had a bad experience in a local shop, which personally I think is very unfortunate.

Same with tradespeople, I guess.

[StraferJack]

You did not have a bad experience. A mistake happened, and was corrected immediately

The rest is you building a house of straw, riddled with "nasty implication"

Basically you are bang out of order. No one else (some going for 30 years)are reporting any problems with this shop.

So this one off error you insist on warning people about and refuse to allow might be an accident is plain malicious

Many people reading this, including you and the staff at smbs, know who I am. I'm not hiding

The staff at smbs have no idea who "sue" is.

I'm sure you so get your other half to distribute posters in there. But why not withdraw them in protest for their shoddy practices if you think that's what they do?

[Sue]

StraferJack Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You did not have a bad experience. A mistake

> happened, and was corrected immediately

>

> The rest is you building a house of straw, riddled

> with "nasty implication"

>

> Basically you are bang out of order. No one else

> (some going for 30 years)are reporting any

> problems with this shop.

>

> So this one off error you insist on warning people

> about and refuse to allow might be an accident is

> plain malicious

>

> Many people reading this, including you and the

> staff at smbs, know who I am. I'm not hiding

>

> The staff at smbs have no idea who "sue" is.

>

> I'm sure you so get your other half to distribute

> posters in there. But why not withdraw them in

> protest for their shoddy practices if you think

> that's what they do?

xxxxx

"I'm sure you so get your other half to distribute posters in there"? What a pleasant person you are. I don't "get my other half" to do anything. He puts posters round, and where he puts them is up to him.

I posted here about one bad experience, not "shoddy practices". Those are your words.

The error was "corrected immediately" because I noticed something wrong, otherwise I would have paid too much and would never have known.

I don't know why you are hounding me about this. I have posted about one incident, in good faith.

I have no idea why you think that is malicious, nor why you are going to such lengths to personally attack me for it, including rather nasty insinuations with no basis in truth. Somewhat ironic in view of what you are accusing me of, no?

The only reason this is dragging on so long is because you persist in posting about it, not because I am "insisting on warning people about it".

I have accurately described what happened. If your (and others) interpretation of it is different to mine, then fine. I hope that yours is correct.

[KidKruger]

Used to go there quite regularly as I cook foreign stuff it was a handy local place to pick up ingredients, if ridiculously priced.

Once the (then) teenager gave me a really sarcy comment when I asked about the huge papayas, it sort of put me off going there after that, I use Rye Lane now unless really pushed.

Perhaps I'm an over-sensitive soul, but unnecessary badness is a turn-off for me.

Good selection of stuff in there tho.

That food shop opposite the kebab shop near LL roundabout is also a real Aladdin's cave of foodstuffs too.

[numbers]

I think you're being unfair on Sue SJ.

Sue didn't set out to slate the shop, merely posted her experience which she is perfectly entitled to do.

Fair enough, it may have been a mistake but if Sue didn't think so and she was there at the time, then she is entitled to voice her opinion and to post it on here in response to someone else's contrasting experience.

Readers can make up their own minds, they're not stupid. We can all be reasonable and give places a second chance, benefit of the doubt and all that but if Sue doesn't want to then that's her call and she misses out on shopping there, not us.

Disclaimer: I think SMBS are great and I envy you all having it on your doorstep. I miss shopping there. Personal service second to none, coconuts broken for you. Love it.

[StraferJack]

If sue didn't think it was a mistake, what does she think it was?

[DulwichFox]

Enough.

http://www.olivebranchcounselling.org.uk/images/olive.jpg

[StraferJack]

Foxy a dove of peace? Seen it all now ;-)

[FJDGoose]

Well put Numbers

[StraferJack]

Sue and I occassionally cross swords on here, but any time I've met here she has been perfectly nice and I have no real beef with her

But nor do I think I have been unfair. A dog with a bone, sure, but not unfair

I agree with most of Numbers fine post but I'm sorry

"Sue didn't set out to slate the shop, merely posted her experience which she is perfectly entitled to do. "

posting her experience is perfectly fine. But to insist others be on their guard because the shop is up to no good is EXACTLY setting out to slate the shop

You think business won't be affected by some people reading that and forming a negative opinion?

Sue also asked for people to come up with reasons for what happened - she rejected all of them.

So the allegation/insinuation that the shop are ongoing crooks (as opposed to a one off incident) remains on the table as far as I can see

If I have that wrong, maybe someone can show me how. If I'm right, why is it ok?

[Sue]

StraferJack Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Sue and I occassionally cross swords on here, but

> any time I've met here she has been perfectly nice

> and I have no real beef with her

>

> But nor do I think I have been unfair. A dog with

> a bone, sure, but not unfair

>

> I agree with most of Numbers fine post but I'm

> sorry

>

> "Sue didn't set out to slate the shop, merely

> posted her experience which she is perfectly

> entitled to do. "

>

> posting her experience is perfectly fine. But to

> insist others be on their guard because the shop

> is up to no good is EXACTLY setting out to slate

> the shop

>

> You think business won't be affected by some

> people reading that and forming a negative

> opinion?

>

> Sue also asked for people to come up with reasons

> for what happened - she rejected all of them.

>

> So the allegation/insinuation that the shop are

> ongoing crooks (as opposed to a one off incident)

> remains on the table as far as I can see

>

> If I have that wrong, maybe someone can show me

> how. If I'm right, why is it ok?

xxxxxxxx

StraferJack, why don't you just leave this alone now? I have earlier been accused of being obsessed with this (when I'm just answering other people's posts) but you are actively and continually bringing the issue up again and again, over and over and over.

I have explained myself pretty fully, I believe, in previous posts.

I have been personally attacked on here in what I consider to be a quite unpleasant way by yourself and by PandG for posting what I originally did, so whether or not you have considered me pefectly nice when you met me is immaterial really.

You have also seen fit to bring The Goose Is Out! and Nygel/FJDGoose into it, which to use your own expression to me is in my opinion bang out of order when my post was made on a personal basis.

I have no idea at all why you persist in stringing this out, and I am tempted just to not respond at all any more, however you are also persisting in saying that I have said things which I have not.

I will take your points in turn. Again. But FFS this is getting tedious.

1.You say "Posting her experience is perfectly fine. But to insist others be on their guard because the shop is up to no good is EXACTLY setting out to slate the shop."

"Insist?" I made one post on this thread describing one experience I had. I subsequently referred to a similar post I made in October about the same incident. How, exactly, is that "insisting"?

"The shop is up to no good"? It was a description of ONE INCIDENT. Clearly I have no knowledge of any similar incidents, and quite frankly, after the way I have been treated on here, nobody is going to speak out if they know of any others, unless they want to be subjected to the same personal abuse as I have been, so we will never know.

As I said, it was a heads-up. Other people post on here with similar heads-ups about particular incidents in particular shops, pubs or other places, or about particular tradespeople. I don't see you hounding them in the way that you have been hounding me on this thread.

I have already said, I made my post in good faith. If you persist in not believing that, then there is nothing I can do to persuade you otherwise, is there?

IF this incident was a genuine mistake, and I have already explained ad nauseam why I do not think it was (and I give an additional reason below), then perhaps people should equally be on their guard for possible similar genuine mistakes happening to them? What - exactly - is wrong with suggesting (not "insisting") that?

2. You say " You think business won't be affected by some people reading that and forming a negative opinion?"

People can make what they like of my post. It is already clear from the comments on here, including yours, that in fact many people believe what happened was a genuine mistake. People are not stupid, as has already been said. They can form their own judgment. There are many positive comments about SMBS on here.

However, your own continual posting on the thread and continually bringing the thread to the top of the page again, means that probably many more people will have seen the thread than otherwise would have done, so if you believe people may form a negative opinion then surely it would be better to do as I and others have asked you to do several times and leave things be?

3. You say "Sue also asked for people to come up with reasons for what happened - she rejected all of them."

I have already explained why I do not consider that the reasons given by yourself and others are plausible. I don't see any point in telling you yet again why that is, as I have already explained it, so it's not clear to me why you keep harping on about it.

Am I supposed to suddenly think "Oh, silly me, those reasons I had for rejecting those possible explanations were completely wrong, duh" ?

Let me add another reason for rejecting your "possible explanations".

When I asked how much the ginger was, the immediate response was "Oh, I have overcharged you."

If you were that person, and somebody asked how much an item was, would you not look at the till roll? And If you then saw that you had made a mistake by putting in the wrong amount, would you not have said something like "oh, oops, I put in the wrong amount"?

And would you not then have apologised?

And when I said (as I did) "You didn't weigh it", would you not have provided some explanation as to why you hadn't weighed it, for example (as you previously suggested) that you didn't need to weigh it because you were so familiar with ginger after many years of experience that you knew exactly how much to charge for any piece of whatever size?

And would you not also have explained - if it was the case - that you had assessed it as being x pence but oops that was an over-assessment sorry, and then your fingers had slipped and you had put in x pounds instead but hadn't noticed, even when the total was added up, and you also hadn't noticed despite your years of experience that the total seemed like quite a lot for the items purchased?

I received no explanation, and no apology.

Sorry to go on, but hopefully you get my point.

4. You say "So the allegation/insinuation that the shop are ongoing crooks (as opposed to a one off incident) remains on the table as far as I can see".

Nowhere have I said that "the shop are ongoing crooks". You have assumed this insinuation from what I have said. I have suggested, in view of my one-off experience, that people be careful. That is quite different from alleging that "the shop are ongoing crooks."

What is still "on the table" is MY INTERPRETATION of an incident which I have accurately described. That is MY INTERPRETATION of ONE INCIDENT. You have chosen to run with it and build - as you accused me of doing, in one of your many earlier posts - an apparent theory that I think that SMBS and everybody in it are crooks.

So you then set up this theory as fact and ask me to defend something which I have never said.

The more you go on and on about this, the more people are going to read this thread and wonder, because you keep bringing it to the top of the page by keeping on posting.

5. You say "If I have that wrong, maybe someone can show me how. If I'm right, why is it ok?"

Well, I've done my best.

PLEASE PLEASE can't you now just let it be, because I'm tired of going over and over and over the same ground, and I'm pretty sure anybody else bothering to continue to read this thread must be extremely tired of it as well.

ETA: And yes, I'm well aware that in replying to your post I too have brought the thread to the top again, but I really am very fed up with being accused of saying things which I haven't, and being made out to be some sort of malicious ogre.

[*Bob*]

Jesus holy mother of god!

[hellosailor]

Sue Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ETA: I don't think you can judge integrity on the

> fact that people seem really nice and friendly and

> have businesses. A few bad experiences with

> tradespeople working on my house have shown me

> that, unfortunately.

>

> ETA: If anybody can come up with another plausible

> explanation for my being charged six quid (exactly

> six quid, by the way) for a small unweighed piece

> of ginger, I will very happily apologise

> unreservedly to SMBS for dissing them on here.

Several other plausible explanations have been put forward now Sue so if you wouldn't mind letting us know when you'll be apologising unreservedly to SMBS I'd happily clear my diary to come and watch?

[StraferJack]

So, TL;DR version is:

"I still say they cheated me (because I'm not admitting it might be an accident), I'm warning other people they might cheat them, but in no way am I insisting they are crooks"

Is that about right?

[StraferJack]

As for correcting other people in other threads about other business, off top of my head there is this:

http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?30,1271498,1272919#msg-1272919

Finally you constantly use thee terms abuse and attack? How so?

[KalamityKel]

BOTH of you stop it. No no no keep those fingers away from the keyboard there is no need to continue fuelling each others comments so stop it!

SMBS IS a great shop - a much needed service to the community. Mistakes happen from time to time and are rectified when spotted as with every other company.

[StraferJack]

I believe that is the same point I'm making KK

[*Bob*]

touched you last

[KalamityKel]

StraferJack Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I believe that is the same point I'm making KK

As u well know there are some ppl who just wont let go ;-)

[*Bob*]

.. and when finally they found themselves alone in a wasteland of rubble and fire under a birdless sky - surrounded only by the corpses of the slain, Sue, summoning her last reserve of strength, turned to Jack and - with her last dying breath - whispered "It.. it was .. 35p.."

[StraferJack]

heh