Discussion:
OT: Dangerous counterfeit laptop chargers seller fined
(too old to reply)
Adrian C
2010-11-13 11:34:10 UTC
Permalink
A heads up,

<http://www.harrowobserver.co.uk/west-london-news/local-harrow-news/2010/11/08/crooked-computer-dealer-ordered-to-repay-ill-gotten-gains-116451-27621650/>

Council notice with pictures
http://www.a-cg.org/guest/pdf/111309evans.pdf

Online business was laptop-chargers.co.uk
--
Adrian C
Adrian C
2010-11-13 11:36:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Adrian C
A heads up,
<http://www.harrowobserver.co.uk/west-london-news/local-harrow-news/2010/11/08/crooked-computer-dealer-ordered-to-repay-ill-gotten-gains-116451-27621650/>
Council notice with pictures
http://www.a-cg.org/guest/pdf/111309evans.pdf
Online business was laptop-chargers.co.uk
Er, opps, 16 Nov 2009 - shoot me ....
--
Adrian C
Daniel James
2010-11-13 13:07:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Adrian C
Er, opps, 16 Nov 2009 - shoot me ....
No, part of the story is current ... Evans was sent to prison on 13 Nov
2009, but the confiscation order for £100k was made on 2nd November
2010.

Shoot the journalist, though:

Investigators were able to pour over a maximum of six years'
worth of accounts to establish his criminal liability ...

s/pour/pore/

The scary thing is the photo of the fake "Sony" label on the dodgy
"Sony" PSU. It looks quite convincing.

Cheers,
Daniel.
Huge
2010-11-13 13:58:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Daniel James
The scary thing is the photo of the fake "Sony" label on the dodgy
"Sony" PSU. It looks quite convincing.
I bought what turned out to be a fake USB memory stick on eBay. The
packaging & labelling was *utterly* convincing.
--
Today is Boomtime, the 25th day of The Aftermath in the YOLD 3176
"Always mount a scratch monkey."
Nick Le Lievre
2010-11-13 14:01:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Huge
Post by Daniel James
The scary thing is the photo of the fake "Sony" label on the dodgy
"Sony" PSU. It looks quite convincing.
I bought what turned out to be a fake USB memory stick on eBay. The
packaging & labelling was *utterly* convincing.
I bought a fake pair of Creative EP-630 earphones on eBay from China,
packaging and actual product was very well faked. The product itself was
actually ok probably not as good as original but I still use them today.
Only cost £ 6.30.
Bill
2010-11-13 22:37:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Huge
Post by Daniel James
The scary thing is the photo of the fake "Sony" label on the dodgy
"Sony" PSU. It looks quite convincing.
I bought what turned out to be a fake USB memory stick on eBay. The
packaging & labelling was *utterly* convincing.
It would be pretty pointless having a poor label, that is what most
people would spot immediately.

I bought a "Sennheiser" microphone from a Chinese seller on Ebay
expecting it to be a copy. I use the real thing all the time and when
the Chinese item arrived it appeared externally to be the same, the
insides also appeared correct, the only obvious difference was in the
zip bag it came in.

On close comparative inspection the band around the grill was about 1mm
different to the genuine article, the wire on the coil was of a heavier
gauge and the material inside the mesh cover was thinner than original.

It was a very good copy and if I hadn't had a genuine one to compare it
against I would not have known the difference. Audio quality was
fractionally down at the higher frequencies, but I doubt if all but an
expert would have noticed, I didn't.
--
Bill
PeterC
2010-11-13 16:36:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Tomlinson
Investigators were able to pour over a maximum of six years'
worth of accounts to establish his criminal liability ...
s/pour/pore/
For jounalists: paw.
--
Peter.
The gods will stay away
whilst religions hold sway
Jack
2010-11-13 14:14:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Adrian C
http://www.a-cg.org/guest/pdf/111309evans.pdf
What I find amazing is the volume of sales - 400 to 500 per month !
geoff
2010-11-13 21:08:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jack
Post by Adrian C
http://www.a-cg.org/guest/pdf/111309evans.pdf
What I find amazing is the volume of sales - 400 to 500 per month !
Yes, I was thinking that

how crap can the originals be ?
--
geoff
js.b1
2010-11-13 21:30:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by geoff
Post by Jack
What I find amazing is the volume of sales - 400 to 500 per month !
Yes, I was thinking that
how crap can the originals be ?
Volume is only roughly 15 a day, which is barely 1 an hour, which
indicates they either sold a) an awful lot of other products or b)
they were making an absolute killing on one product (illegally) or c)
using it merely as a second top-up income (pay the electricity & gas
bill, car insurance, house insurance) or d) a student using it to give
them effectively 27hrs in a 24hr day re money.

The originals are not crap, people have small cases which carry the
laptop and not the PSU. Thus they want a PSU at home... at the
office... spare in the car... etc.
Mike Tomlinson
2010-11-13 11:46:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Adrian C
<http://www.harrowobserver.co.uk/west-london-news/local-harrow-
news/2010/11/08/crooked-computer-dealer-ordered-to-repay-ill-gotten-gains-
116451-27621650/>
"Investigators were able to pour over a maximum of six years' worth..."
^^^^
What is it with reporters these days? Even the Torygraph gets it wrong,
and on the front page no less.

Thanks for the heads-up.
--
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
Chris Whelan
2010-11-13 12:46:29 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 11:46:06 +0000, Mike Tomlinson wrote:

[...]
Post by Mike Tomlinson
"Investigators were able to pour over a maximum of six years' worth..."
^^^^
What is it with reporters these days? Even the Torygraph gets it wrong,
and on the front page no less.
Reliance on spell checking, I would imagine.

If it hasn't got a wiggly line under it, then it must be correct...

Chris
--
Remove prejudice to reply.
Mike Barnes
2010-11-13 13:19:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chris Whelan
[...]
Post by Mike Tomlinson
"Investigators were able to pour over a maximum of six years' worth..."
^^^^
What is it with reporters these days? Even the Torygraph gets it wrong,
and on the front page no less.
Reliance on spell checking, I would imagine.
If it hasn't got a wiggly line under it, then it must be correct...
At the Guardian, even if it has got a wiggly line underneath it, it's
apparently OK. I've lost count of the number of actual spelling errors
I've seen recently, including IIRC (on the front page) "Mililband".
--
Mike Barnes
Tinkerer
2010-11-13 17:37:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Barnes
Post by Chris Whelan
[...]
Post by Mike Tomlinson
"Investigators were able to pour over a maximum of six years' worth..."
^^^^
What is it with reporters these days? Even the Torygraph gets it wrong,
and on the front page no less.
Reliance on spell checking, I would imagine.
If it hasn't got a wiggly line under it, then it must be correct...
At the Guardian, even if it has got a wiggly line underneath it, it's
apparently OK. I've lost count of the number of actual spelling errors
I've seen recently, including IIRC (on the front page) "Mililband".
Didn't that use to be 'The Muncaster Grudian'? ;o)
--
Tinkerer
unknown
2010-11-13 12:16:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Adrian C
<http://www.harrowobserver.co.uk/west-london-news/local-harrow-news/2010/1
1/08/crooked-computer-dealer-ordered-to-repay-ill-gotten-gains-116451-2762
1650/>
"Investigators were able to pour over a maximum of six years' worth of
accounts"

Tssk, ITTM "to pore over".
Grimly Curmudgeon
2010-12-07 14:50:09 UTC
Permalink
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
Post by Adrian C
A heads up,
<http://www.harrowobserver.co.uk/west-london-news/local-harrow-news/2010/11/08/crooked-computer-dealer-ordered-to-repay-ill-gotten-gains-116451-27621650/>
"Investigators were able to pour over "

I'm not surprised they were dangerous, then.
Colonel Edmund J. Burke
2010-12-07 14:55:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Grimly Curmudgeon
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
Post by Adrian C
A heads up,
<http://www.harrowobserver.co.uk/west-london-news/local-harrow-news/2010/11/08/crooked-computer-dealer-ordered-to-repay-ill-gotten-gains-116451-27621650/>
"Investigators were able to pour over "
"Pour"? LOL

MORE ENGLISH ILLITERACY!

Loading...