A lot of people have Sunday Lunch, a nice roast beef with all the trimmings, all washed down with a couple of pints. Mark enjoys Sunday Rants instead, a nasty series of posts with lots of abuse and insults, washed down with a number of wild accusations.
Mark starts the day with an extremely long rant, fully dedicated to Mr B. Let’s see what Mark had for breakfast, looks like he ate Mr B alive.
by Statto » 05 Mar 2017 09:47
Hi is the architect of his own ridicule. His stupidity knows no bounds and is why many people see him purely as a laughing stock.
Like Mrs X & Potty Peachy, Mr B is an extremely insecure individual. He seeks to create this image on the internet of a highly intelligent, highly successful man, with a string of properties. He appears to have gotten away with this bluff for several years but that ship has now long since sailed.
Notice his constant use of the word “we”. As we saw with Peachy yesterday (and previously on Quatloos), it is a trait that many insecure people use, in order to hide behind numbers.
The greatest evidence of his insecurity comes by way of his claims to have accrued a property empire over the years. One look at the neglected state of his ex-council house would suggest that he’s never had the money to update that, let alone invest in further properties. The 2 separate charges on the dump would support this view. Why would someone tell such an obvious lie to complete strangers on the internet? Ones wealth and background is irrelevant when it comes to advice forums. It only becomes relevant when some head the ball like Mr B tells lies in order to promote his own internet ego. Many internet advice forums have been ruined by selfish people like Mr B, who never actually advises himself, he just takes cheap shots at those who do, in the misguided belief that he comes across as some expert who is “outraged” at people being given wrong advice-Nowadays, he has been found out and is reduced to posting nonsense that nobody reads, other than the few people who fancy another laugh at his expense.
A classic example of Mr B “understanding” the law was his pathetic attempt to show that fees could be added to AOEs. He wrote to his local council who replied. Mr B then began quoting them as if he’d known all along (typical Mr B MO). The problem that Mr B had was that the council had quoted him legislation that had been repealed. It was left to those who really understand the law to explain to everyone what the real situation was. As usual, Mr B was left to crawl back under his stone, with his tail between his legs.
Mrs X has never really understood the law but in her defence, she has never claimed to. Post April 2014, she is totally lost as she doesn’t know when to let go of previous law and practices. She often gets into a real muddle. She constantly harps on about “accurate information”. However, when her own stupidity is pointed out, she never corrects it. There was one post on LB when she told a debtor that he was in a vulnerable household (his wife was pregnant). When this was pointed out to her, she made up some cock and bull story that she had spoken with the OP and that nobody knew the full facts other than her. She was adamant not to admit that she was wrong. These silly interpretations are frequent and her shocking advice to a man that the bailiff could take his girlfriends car because she was jointly liable for HIS debt surprised even me. Recently she has criticised us for suggesting a detailed assessment for HCEO fees, as usual she suggests a well drafted letter to the HCEOA. This of course is further evidence of her lack of knowledge. Not only is the law very clear that any disputes over fees should be carried out by way of a detailed assessment but it is there for all to see on the HCEOA website.
Mrs X cannot accept the fact that sharper, more intelligent people are now on the scene and that she has been left behind. I honestly believe that Mrs X genuinely thinks that people are jealous of her. She is that twisted and that far up her own backside that she doesn’t realise that nearly everyone on the ne sees her for the nasty, selfish, raving lunatic that she is. She is another one who has long missed the boat. Mrs X’s boat sailed about 2 years ago but like most has beens, they never know when to bow out gracefully.
Hard to believe, but less than an hour later, Mark was ready for another longish rant, against the same person. How many times can you repeat the same arguments? Where Mark is concerned, ad infinitum.
by Statto » 05 Mar 2017 10:41
I love how he claims to “get people booted off”. Roughly translated, it means that they began to smack his bottom and when Sharon asked them to stop, they continued, so she banned all 3. (not as “Davyly though, this is another lie). What would it achieve any way? Just like him, they will simply re-register under a different name. For clarity, the chimp has never got anyone “booted off” a forum in his sorry life.
In his idiotic, moronic single brain cell, this amounts to him getting people booted off. I don’t think he realises that most people are not like him. They do not join websites like LB for their own gratification, they do so to help others. This grubby little tramp can’t help himself, let alone anyone else. He thinks it an achievement to drag people down to his level.
Regarding the timeline, the chimp only really decided that he was an “expert” in bailiff law in 2014 when the new regs came out. Prior to this point, he was a “expert” in consumer credit. Almost everything he has learned about enforcement has come from this forum correcting his garbage, from AOEs, to culpable neglect, all the way through to coercive threats of imprisonment.
No sooner had he finished typing the above rant, he felt compelled to give Mrs X the attention he thinks she deserves.
by Statto » 05 Mar 2017 11:08
It is about time that this matter was addressed as well.
Is that the same confidential information that you are caught in a recorded telephone conversation quoting? You read through the CLOSED Facebook quotes, quoting Donna amongst others. You claim not to know anything about Donna and then end the call by admitting that you know that she posts a lot on the Tom Crawford thread.
You are an utter idiot Mrs X. Nobody has ever claimed to have access to that CLOSED Facebook page, other. than you. Maybe its you who has the warped opinion Mrs X? We know that you have access to the CLOSED Facebook page. Please provide evidence that anyone else has before making your silly claims.
Come on then Mrs X address the matter:
- What were you doing with screenshots of a CLOSED Facebook page?
- How do you know that Donna posts on the Tom Crawford thread?
- Please provide evidence that anyone else is as sick and twisted as you and is remotely interested in drivel from a CLOSED Facebook page.
It’s now lunchtime, he’s spent the entire morning ranting on his soapbox. For most people, it would be time for lunch with the family. For Mark Bowley, it’s time for yet another extremely long rant and his targets remain the same. Is there anyone else who can sustain this level of ranting against the same people, ad nauseam?
by Statto » 05 Mar 2017 13:30
I want to see if she’s so quick to open her big mouth first. Surely she must realise it is the same source that obtained details of the charges on the chimps ex-council house and has nothing to do with xxxx? Will she be so quick to correct her mistake, given her so called passion for accurate information? Of course she won’t. The truth is, she wants to turn the screw on a man who is not well, cannot defend himself and who wants nothing to do with the forums. It is reasons like this that I despise Mrs X, not for any ridiculous reason of jealousy. She is pure 100% evil.
She’s already scored one own goal this morning, regarding her stupidity about her saved screenshots of some shitty FB group (she is that stupid, she actually thinks others have the same levels of obsessions as she does and would want screenshots of such garbage)
She then makes a ridiculous statement about breaching confidentiality about something that she claims didn’t even exist in the first place.
Finally, she then goes on to claim that xxxx told people about this event that didn’t actually happen.
If she wants to continue denying that there’s a charge on Clouds (over and above the mortgage) then that’s entirely up to her.
She is also harping on about supposed card details being revealed. Perhaps she could provide us evidence that this has actually taken place? I would also be interested to discover how many times this card has been fraudulently used since the transaction in question took place, almost 2 years ago.
The woman is an idiot who clutches at straws to make a drama where one doesn’t exist. She certainly seems to be an angry old Mrs X these days. I can’t for the life of me think why?
Mark, you can’t think why Mrs X is so angry these days? Are you not reading your own posts?
Having had his two favourite people for lunch, he’s still hungry for more and chooses Mr B for desert.
by Statto » 05 Mar 2017 13:48
Because they are all such utter thickos, they think that because I offered to divulge the chimp’s card details in an off the cuff post yesterday, that I am going to get jailed for 5 years.
Why would I want the card details of a tramp who lives on benefits? It’s hardly going to have a massive balance is it?
Mrs X is probably wetting her knickers as we speak, over the prospect of a “Mrs X special” complaint to the police.
Statto has had enough for one day, it’s now time for Tuco to come to life, and it will be Tuco who will be posting the next rant.