Kathyryn
Seattle,#2Consumer Comment
Thu, April 02, 2009
To the person above me, you must be confused. You've obviously never spoken to a lawyer, about this or anything else. Had you you would know that if someone /wrote/ something false about you it would be considered libel, not slander, something a child would know let alone an individual who has passed the barr. Slander, my dear, is spoken, not written. What the person stated in her original post is neither slander nor libel as they do not claim anything malicious against you or anyone else. You've admitted that what she's said is true, that she was told one thing and after she'd paid she was given the bait and switch and no longer was in the position she was told she would be in. Indeed she was out 20 boxes, t.w.e.n.t.y. More than a tiny error there.
Kathyryn
Seattle,#3Consumer Comment
Thu, April 02, 2009
To the person above me, you must be confused. You've obviously never spoken to a lawyer, about this or anything else. Had you you would know that if someone /wrote/ something false about you it would be considered libel, not slander, something a child would know let alone an individual who has passed the barr. Slander, my dear, is spoken, not written. What the person stated in her original post is neither slander nor libel as they do not claim anything malicious against you or anyone else. You've admitted that what she's said is true, that she was told one thing and after she'd paid she was given the bait and switch and no longer was in the position she was told she would be in. Indeed she was out 20 boxes, t.w.e.n.t.y. More than a tiny error there.
Kathyryn
Seattle,#4Consumer Comment
Thu, April 02, 2009
To the person above me, you must be confused. You've obviously never spoken to a lawyer, about this or anything else. Had you you would know that if someone /wrote/ something false about you it would be considered libel, not slander, something a child would know let alone an individual who has passed the barr. Slander, my dear, is spoken, not written. What the person stated in her original post is neither slander nor libel as they do not claim anything malicious against you or anyone else. You've admitted that what she's said is true, that she was told one thing and after she'd paid she was given the bait and switch and no longer was in the position she was told she would be in. Indeed she was out 20 boxes, t.w.e.n.t.y. More than a tiny error there.
Tamica
Calgary,#5REBUTTAL Individual responds
Mon, September 15, 2008
please find a way to remove this. I have contacted a lawyer and this is straight slander. this woman lied...is still lying, and i do not appreciate my name being linked to this. i will need a response immediately, otherwise action will be taken. as a matter of fact, it already has started. thank you.
Anne
Calgary,#6Author of original report
Sun, March 23, 2008
I am sorry to read the update by Tamica. If there were not the amount of boxes of LA LITES, then the proper way to handle it would be to TALK to the client, NOT just change the amounts and hope she won't notice. It goes to show how fickle the so called counsellors are, when they want to blame my non-weight loss on my NON-TRUST of a company. I rest my case. I was LIED to and communication was never there! THAT in itself is NOT how employees of any company who are supposedly HELPING, should ACT. I liked and enjoyed ALL the employees until I found I was deceived, and the trust was totally lost. My life is good. I don't embrace DECEIPT/sneeky people.
Tamica
Calgary,#7UPDATE Employee
Sat, January 26, 2008
I was very alarmed and disturbed that my full name was linked to this complaint. I just happened to google my name today and lo and behold, this negativity appeared linked to my name. The last time (about 2 years ago) when I googled my name, it came up linked to my deceased grandfather's obituary (thornton johnstone). You can imagine how one feels when they do a random search and this appears. The decision made by the owner in regards to the lalite dispute was HER decision...not mine....I only followed orders and did as I was directed to do. The fact is that Anne Macallister did in fact not have as many lalites as what was in her original file. What had happened was she had come in and redeemed some of her pre-purchased lalites, and whomever she had met with had failed to document accordingly in her file. However, when we pulled the redeem report, we were able to physically show Anne what had happened, and that she indeed had less lalites than originally quoted. Anne pulled something very sneaky and went into the center on a day that I was not in and unbenounst to the staff, she took all the lalites, which then resulted in my paycheque being garnished to cover the loss. I understand Anne's frustration, however I do not appreciate my name being linked to this when you try to google tamica johnstone. Is there any way we can fix this please? And to call the staff losers? well perhaps her frustration also comes from her failure at weight loss and this is a good way to vent her frustrations, but does this mean we should call her a loser also? Only losers are sneaky and manipulating, and this was precisely how she conducted herself. Maybe she should have spend more time worrying about losing her weight loss to prolong her life, rather than waste her precious energy(and having anxiety???) creating a problem that she in fact started by taking boxes she didnt even pay for. (and that ended up costing me)
Tamica
Calgary,#8UPDATE Employee
Sat, January 26, 2008
I was very alarmed and disturbed that my full name was linked to this complaint. I just happened to google my name today and lo and behold, this negativity appeared linked to my name. The last time (about 2 years ago) when I googled my name, it came up linked to my deceased grandfather's obituary (thornton johnstone). You can imagine how one feels when they do a random search and this appears. The decision made by the owner in regards to the lalite dispute was HER decision...not mine....I only followed orders and did as I was directed to do. The fact is that Anne Macallister did in fact not have as many lalites as what was in her original file. What had happened was she had come in and redeemed some of her pre-purchased lalites, and whomever she had met with had failed to document accordingly in her file. However, when we pulled the redeem report, we were able to physically show Anne what had happened, and that she indeed had less lalites than originally quoted. Anne pulled something very sneaky and went into the center on a day that I was not in and unbenounst to the staff, she took all the lalites, which then resulted in my paycheque being garnished to cover the loss. I understand Anne's frustration, however I do not appreciate my name being linked to this when you try to google tamica johnstone. Is there any way we can fix this please? And to call the staff losers? well perhaps her frustration also comes from her failure at weight loss and this is a good way to vent her frustrations, but does this mean we should call her a loser also? Only losers are sneaky and manipulating, and this was precisely how she conducted herself. Maybe she should have spend more time worrying about losing her weight loss to prolong her life, rather than waste her precious energy(and having anxiety???) creating a problem that she in fact started by taking boxes she didnt even pay for. (and that ended up costing me)
Tamica
Calgary,#9UPDATE Employee
Sat, January 26, 2008
I was very alarmed and disturbed that my full name was linked to this complaint. I just happened to google my name today and lo and behold, this negativity appeared linked to my name. The last time (about 2 years ago) when I googled my name, it came up linked to my deceased grandfather's obituary (thornton johnstone). You can imagine how one feels when they do a random search and this appears. The decision made by the owner in regards to the lalite dispute was HER decision...not mine....I only followed orders and did as I was directed to do. The fact is that Anne Macallister did in fact not have as many lalites as what was in her original file. What had happened was she had come in and redeemed some of her pre-purchased lalites, and whomever she had met with had failed to document accordingly in her file. However, when we pulled the redeem report, we were able to physically show Anne what had happened, and that she indeed had less lalites than originally quoted. Anne pulled something very sneaky and went into the center on a day that I was not in and unbenounst to the staff, she took all the lalites, which then resulted in my paycheque being garnished to cover the loss. I understand Anne's frustration, however I do not appreciate my name being linked to this when you try to google tamica johnstone. Is there any way we can fix this please? And to call the staff losers? well perhaps her frustration also comes from her failure at weight loss and this is a good way to vent her frustrations, but does this mean we should call her a loser also? Only losers are sneaky and manipulating, and this was precisely how she conducted herself. Maybe she should have spend more time worrying about losing her weight loss to prolong her life, rather than waste her precious energy(and having anxiety???) creating a problem that she in fact started by taking boxes she didnt even pay for. (and that ended up costing me)
Tamica
Calgary,#10UPDATE Employee
Sat, January 26, 2008
I was very alarmed and disturbed that my full name was linked to this complaint. I just happened to google my name today and lo and behold, this negativity appeared linked to my name. The last time (about 2 years ago) when I googled my name, it came up linked to my deceased grandfather's obituary (thornton johnstone). You can imagine how one feels when they do a random search and this appears. The decision made by the owner in regards to the lalite dispute was HER decision...not mine....I only followed orders and did as I was directed to do. The fact is that Anne Macallister did in fact not have as many lalites as what was in her original file. What had happened was she had come in and redeemed some of her pre-purchased lalites, and whomever she had met with had failed to document accordingly in her file. However, when we pulled the redeem report, we were able to physically show Anne what had happened, and that she indeed had less lalites than originally quoted. Anne pulled something very sneaky and went into the center on a day that I was not in and unbenounst to the staff, she took all the lalites, which then resulted in my paycheque being garnished to cover the loss. I understand Anne's frustration, however I do not appreciate my name being linked to this when you try to google tamica johnstone. Is there any way we can fix this please? And to call the staff losers? well perhaps her frustration also comes from her failure at weight loss and this is a good way to vent her frustrations, but does this mean we should call her a loser also? Only losers are sneaky and manipulating, and this was precisely how she conducted herself. Maybe she should have spend more time worrying about losing her weight loss to prolong her life, rather than waste her precious energy(and having anxiety???) creating a problem that she in fact started by taking boxes she didnt even pay for. (and that ended up costing me)