SofaKingCool

We’ve all been there, wake up in the morning and notice that your twat of a neighbour has launched a lighter into your windscreen and cracked it, well maybe not all of you but I’m sure any drivers out there have experienced the nightmare that is a cracked windscreen.  I first noticed this crack on a cold morning before setting off for work, it was at the top and kind of hidden behind the rain sensor and tinted section of the screen.  At first I assumed it was just a flying stone but the debris of a lighter was also found within the immediate area.  However I didn’t think much about it as I had windscreen cover with my car insurance and made the call when I arrived home that evening.

The call was fairly straight forward, they took my details and advised me someone would call back to arrange the replacement.  A few minutes later Autoglass called and asked about the car and the damage then told me that he would arrive the following day.  Just as we were sorting out the finer details he told me it would cost £75 for a repair and £150 for a replacement, apparently my rather expensive windscreen cover carried a high excess!  I told him not to bother calling out until I had spoken to my insurance company (Admiral via Bell).  They then told me that the excess was required and I should have opted for the “free” windscreen cover at a cost of £70 a year (I’m already paying an extra £50).  Completely unhappy with this and knowing my insurance was due for renewal a couple of weeks later I chanced driving with the ever increasing crack in my screen.

After 2 weeks of watching this crack get bigger I decided to bite the bullet and start getting quotes, my partner has a premier account with Lloyds TSB which offers a big discount if you buy from AA windscreens, however that quote came in at £600 with the discount.  Thinking that I would be better off just paying the excess I made one more enquiry and found a local company (Auto Price Windscreens) who quoted me £140 for the screen and fitting.  As this was cheaper than the excess I arranged a next day replacement at my workplace.

Now I work in Stoke, the head office is in Telford (where I live) however I drive a company car around the country as part of my job meaning I was not there to inspect the work once finished.  I paid over the phone before he came out and collected the car once I had finished work.  The invoice had some advice about when I could drive the car and the “no car wash for 4 days” warning and all appeared good.  The following day the company car wasn’t available so I drove my car to Norfolk to do a job and on the way home the windscreen lifted and the rubber flew off.  After making a dive into the hard shoulder I retrieved the trim pieces and called them.

I was quite angry at the situation as I was stuck in Milton Keynes on the side of a motorway wondering if I could drive home.  The MD then called me and once I had told him the problem I was safe to drive home (slowly) and he would send someone out to me as soon as he could.  I got home and just started making a cup of coffee when a van pulled up and the fitter knocked my door, amazed that they knew I was home I showed the chap the problem and he set about fixing it.  Problem sorted or so I thought…

Today I decided to go to the garden centre to make use of the week off I have and went over a pothole and a big part of my rain sensor/alarm thingy/rear view mirror fell off and was left hanging on by a couple of brightly coloured wires.  Once again I called them and they advised me that someone would call out within the hour.  Just as the friendly lady had said a chirpy chappy came out and fixed the mirror thingy, cleaned up the roof lining, polished the windscreen inside and out and even had a crack at polishing my dashboard.

One happy customer later I finish off my gardening and think about telling the world about a company who stand by their work and who came out to me to put right any problems I had.  Do I think they should have done the job correctly the first time?  Yes of course, however they haven’t once given me the brush off and have fixed everything professionally, without question and best of all without charge.  Would I use them again and recommend them?  Yes 100%  I doubt any of the major companies would have tried so hard and called out twice to put things right without charge.

So if you are in the Stafford/Shropshire area and need a windscreen then try Auto Price Windscreens by calling 0800 298 0469

http://www.autopricewindscreens.com/

A helping hand 0800 298 0469, autoglass, cheap, cover, excess, http://www.autopricewindscreens.com, insurance, no complaints, repair, replace, telford, windscreen, windscreen repair in shrewsbury, windscreen repair in stafford, windscreen repair in stoke, windscreen repair in telford

A look into what went wrong with Excel and a response from the former MD Mr Stuart Box.

It would appear that our friends at Excell have gone bump. Yes I understand that you have probably heard this before on this blog but after a slight legal issue I can now post this.

On the 6^th of December Excell Communications was placed into administration by Begbies Traynor after the company ran out of money, leaving up to £1.3 million owed to customers.  The Midlands based mobile dealer used to offer low cost tariffs and services by offering cash-back or redemption deals which is common within the industry.  Basically the customer would sign up to a £30 a month tariff and the dealer would give a cash back of £125.00 which would effectively reduce the monthly cost to £25.00 (24 months x £5).  This way the dealer can “undercut” the network’s advertised price meaning the customer gets a better deal, the network gets a subscriber and the dealer gets a returning customer, everyone wins.  This business model is very common among dealers and Excell had successfully used it for many years prior to its collapse.

18 months prior to the collapse of Excell Stuart Box (former MD) had taken a leave of absence for personal reasons, during this time the company was run by Richard Taylor and the existing management team.  However when Stuart decided he needed to leave the business there were complications between the distributor and existing management team.  These complications left the company in financial hardship and as we all know these financial difficulties eventually driving the company into administration.  Although no longer part of the business, Stuart still contributed financially towards the business out of his own pocket, yet no amount of funding was going to save this sinking ship.  This contribution was born out of loyalty to those staff,  including many family members still working within the business who had worked for Stuart for a number of years. Stuart was of the firm opinion that common sense would prevail and that trading relationships would resume.  This contribution was supplied as loan to the new owner of the business.  Unfortunately, trading relationships were not resumed between the Distributor and the new owner leaving Stuart as a large creditor of Excell.

Stuart also ran another two businesses (B2BMobile & Wolves Mobile) which had been trading independently since 2006 which were not part of Excell and removed all association from the failing Excell business.  This might have looked like Stuart was bailing out yet this was not the case, these businesses were completely separate entities and was well within his rights to protect his current business interests however the damage was already done.  Interestingly Stuart had no access to the administrators reports as he was no longer part of Excell and could not have guessed the trouble the business was in.

Orange decided to take the decision to issue a “do not deal” notice to all companies involved or previously linked to Excell (including B2BMobile).  I have to point out that it isn’t just Stuart’s companies who have been hit with this condemnation from the Orange, premier telesales now owned by Richard Taylor, and all its associated companies have also taken a fall for their part in the Excell collapse.

As you are probably aware I have taken this mission rather personally and published various stories that were removed from the internet regarding this.  However as I pointed out at the beginning of this post I had a slight legal hiccup regarding some of the comments I had made and through this I got an opportunity to speak to Stuart Box personally.  I have offered him the opportunity to set the record straight regarding the whole Excell saga.  The post will appear completely unedited and exactly as he wrote it, I will however put full moderation on the comments, this is to prevent a flame war starting, as was the case on various other sites.

On the subject of flaming, this post does not mean I am siding with anyone, had any involvement or condone what happened.  I just believe everyone has a right to an unbiased platform to tell their side of the story.

A note worth adding at this point is that as of 18:48 on 15th April 2011 premierphoneshop.co.uk is offline, by the looks of things all files have been removed from the domain directories, however BKMobile and PremierTelesales are still live.

Excell Communications (Shropshire) Limited administration notice

10 January 2011

As you may be aware, Excell Communications (Shropshire) was placed into Administration on 6 December 2010.

Any amounts owed to customers will form part of an unsecured claim in the Administration proceedings.  Indications are that there are insufficient funds to make any payments to customers under any cash back agreements or transfer fees from previous airtime providers and any monies owed to you will be lost.

If you have not already done so, please log your details, including any amounts owed to you, via our website link to Excellcommunications@begbies-traynor.com.

Queries regarding your ongoing contracts should be directed to your airtime operator.

Begbies Traynor is unable to answer any individual queries and telephone calls will not be taken.  All enquiries in writing please but given the number of customers affected, it may be some time before we are able to respond.

Stuart has given us a statement which we have published in full below in a completely unedited format.  Please note that due to this statement coming directly from Stuart, no correspondence will be entered into regarding this.

Statement

In the past few months numerous bloggers have made inaccurate claims against me in connection with this matter and when I have sought to have them removed, the incorrect accusations  re - appear via different means of social media which has caused great distress to me and my family.

I have agreed to give this final statement purely on the basis of trying to get some facts across so that readers are not left to rely on rumour, speculation and inaccurate reporting of my involvement.

In all honesty, I haven’t known how to fight back against these allegations, believing publishers were bound by libel laws which mean the claims had to be taken down.

This has been a huge source of stress not only for me but for my family, who were at the heart of the reason why I left Excell and had not been playing an active part in the business for a year and a half prior to my departure from the company.

It was reported I sold the company “just weeks” before it went into administration. It would be reasonable to surmise from that, that there was a degree of expectation of anticipated financial difficulties on the horizon. This could not be further from the truth. There is no connection between me leaving Excell and my former company going into administration. I left following an 18 month sabbatical due to personal reasons following the birth of my son and an illness in the family.

When any company goes under it is a difficult time. When that company is one that you have built up from scratch, working with close family and friends, the toll of distress on those involved can be heartbreaking.

Adding to this nightmare is the inaccurate and in some cases very damaging accusations made against me and my current company. In recent months both me and my family have been the subjects of personal abuse and unfounded accusations from online commentators and local speculation. I hope that my setting out some of the facts here goes some way to helping people understand the nightmare myself and my family are now enduring.

I have every sympathy for those owed money and I myself are a larger creditor of Excell  because, in a bid to save Excell and even though I had by that time left the company, I have also signed a number of personal guarantees that have also resulted in substantial financial claims being made against me.

Due to the very nature of this and the complications surrounding the administration of the business, I do not wish to make any further comments relating to Excell and would welcome the opportunity for me and my family to move on .

Mobile & Cellular administration, b2b, b2bmobile, Begbies, box, cellular, dealer, do not deal, excell, excell communications, facts, Midland, mobile phone, Orange, premier phoneshop, premier telesales, Richard Taylor, shropshire, social media, statement, stuart, stuart box, telford, Traynor, truth, webologist, wolves mobile

Security Communications Release: Security Advisory posted (KB26296: Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the BlackBerry Web Desktop Manager component of the BlackBerry Enterprise Server”)

On April 12, 2011, Research In Motion (RIM) released a security advisory, KB26296: Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the BlackBerry Web Desktop Manager component of the BlackBerry Enterprise Server. This security advisory provides details of a known cross-site scripting vulnerability in the BlackBerry Web Desktop Manager component of the BlackBerry Enterprise Server and BlackBerry Enterprise Server Express.

RIM has issued interim security software updates that resolve the issue in supported software versions of the affected software. Resolution for the issue is available by downloading and applying the interim security software update for the appropriate affected software version. Links to the updates are listed in the Resolution section of the security advisory. Orange recommends that BlackBerry Enterprise Server or IT administrators should apply the software updates.

The vulnerability could allow an attacker to execute externally supplied scripts using the user privileges of the BlackBerry Web Desktop Manager. This could allow the attacker to perform any BlackBerry Web Desktop Manager task that the legitimate user could perform on a BlackBerry smartphone while the user is logged in to the BlackBerry Web Desktop Manager. Such tasks include remotely wiping and disabling the device, remotely resetting the device password and locking the device, and activating the user’s account on another device over the wireless network.

Successful exploitation of this issue requires an attacker to persuade the legitimate user to click a specially crafted URL in a web browser or an email or instant message.

For further information, please see the posted security advisory above.

Mobile & Cellular 01952602260, 02, 08707777701, bb, BES, blackberry, cento, centoconsultants, cheap, consultants, geko, gekodirect, microsoft, Orange, ripoff, scam, scammers, stoke on trent, uma, voip

Oh how this message has haunted me over the past couple of hours.  The story goes something like this; customer pays for on site support, I advise customer to prepare server and create BES admin user, then I arrive.  Install the BES Express onto the Windows 2003 server, plug it in to exchange & AD, so far everything is looking good, yet the installation skips the MAPI option.    Anyhow, the software finally installs and I connect the device to the server to do a wired activation and set up.  I create a user and try to assign a user to attached device.  Then up pops the dreaded message  The BlackBerry Administration Service was unable to retrieve specific device attributes from the device that is connected to your computer. At first I believe this is down to the device being setup via BIS first, so a hand held wipe and cleanup is completed.  This solved nothing, so I checked the permissions of the admin account that was setup all looked well until I attempted to ensure that the account could log on as a service and realised that the right service manager in my computer differed to what I normally see, there was no local security option.

At this point I had decided that the admin account might have been setup incorrectly so tried in vain to follow the steps laid out in the install guide with no success.  It was then I decided to go guerrilla on the server, I created a user (in AD users and computers), assigned a mailbox (in server manager), allowed the send as, receive as and information store permissions (right clicked AD users and computers) and sent the test mails via outlook web access.  Following that I un-installed the BESE and cleaned out the old databases.  After logging into the BESAdmin account I had just created I started the install, this eventually threw up the MAPI option which was missing from the initial setup.  With the install complete I added the users and connected the device to the server, then clicked the assign device to user button and hid under the desk.  Whilst under there I noticed that the handset was doing stuff so jumped up and saw that it had assigned correctly.

I then went about generating some activation passwords and sending them wirelessly to the devices.  A few minutes pass and we start to see users appear next to devices, Woooooo Hoooooo!

Not satisfied with “just” fixing it I needed to troubleshoot the initial install to find out what went wrong.  After scouring through the old server logs, I couldn’t see any failure points and felt like throwing the server in the bin.  Eventually I noticed something about the admin account that was created for the first install.

The initial account was what the customer used as the main windows account and was a Domain Controller.  This is what stopped the system working, how?  I am still working on that one but if like me you had this fault then check the following:

You log into server using the BESAdmin account, ensure that the BESAdmin account is a Domain User, ensure it is a member of the administrators group, give it send as and receive as permissions and finally check it can access and edit the information store.  On a side note, if you use the windows server 2003 manager and MS SQL then you do not need to check for SQL permissions as it is set to give full access to admins by default.

So if you get stuck and can’t see any possible causes just check the account permissions.  Failing that give me a shout and I will see if I can help!

A helping hand, Geko Direct Limited 01952602260, 08707777701, 2003, bb, BES, BESAdmin, bese, besexpress, besx, BIS, blackberry, BlackBerry Server Express, cheap, enterprise, geko, gekodirect, help, microsoft, no complaints, Orange, orange bis, server 2003, uma