|
||||||||
Why on earth does Max have to complain about? |
![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: North Lanarkshire
Posts: 3,214
|
Why on earth does Max have to complain about?
He stole the properties in the first place by tricking Ben, so why is he throwing a big tantrum now because he has had to give them back?
It's not like he has actually lost anything. It's totally ridiculous. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 7,564
|
The car lot was Max's to start with, so he has lost that. He's no right to complain though, he shouldn't have set out to con someone else in the first place. He shouldn't have taken advantage of a foolish, troubled boy to get back at his father.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,746
|
His premise for the con was flawed given it was Nick not Phil who was the cause of Emma's death but Max kept up the war with Phil anyway even when Phil was exonerated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 14,621
|
what I dont understand about the Car Lot - isnt David Wicks owner or co-owner or something?
surely Phil would need both signatures to take it
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: I like to singy singy singy...
Posts: 17,667
|
Quote:
His premise for the con was flawed given it was Nick not Phil who was the cause of Emma's death but Max kept up the war with Phil anyway even when Phil was exonerated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Downtown
Posts: 5,810
|
Quote:
what I dont understand about the Car Lot - isnt David Wicks owner or co-owner or something?
surely Phil would need both signatures to take it ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3,326
|
I've got no sympathy for him. He's brought it all on himself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Devon, UK
Posts: 4,644
|
No sympathy at all for Max.
He fell for Phil's 'sting' re. the dodgy cars because he was beig sold the lie by an attractive blonde - he was thinking with his d**k as usual. Perhaps he has learned his lesson, and will keep it in his pants from now on. The ageing roue act is wearing a little thin. |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 258
|
What on earth why?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 13,318
|
Well the carlot was Max's not Phil's so he does have the right to complain about losing that and being jobless as a result, though I agree that he wouldn't be in this mess if he hadn't conned Ben out of the Arches to begin with.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 157
|
Quote:
what I dont understand about the Car Lot - isnt David Wicks owner or co-owner or something?
surely Phil would need both signatures to take it ![]() How much of the car lot does David actually own, it could just be a small stake. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 116,685
|
I would complain, if someone give me that " Black vest 'n' pants !!!
![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: In the Wind
Posts: 28,373
|
Max needs to have a full-on breakdown and then take steps to rebuild his life because as of now the character is so frustrating to watch.
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: hiding from the taxman
Posts: 4,126
|
But Phil conned the arches out of Ian. And now he stole Max business - and sole source of income- is Phil going to receive his comeuppance?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,233
|
Quote:
But Phil conned the arches out of Ian. And now he stole Max business - and sole source of income- is Phil going to receive his comeuppance?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Master of all fit EE males
Posts: 6,526
|
Quote:
He stole the properties in the first place by tricking Ben, so why is he throwing a big tantrum now because he has had to give them back?
It's not like he has actually lost anything. It's totally ridiculous. Max brought it all on himself for taking advantage of Ben. |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,444
|
My sympathy for Max is for the loss of the car lot, but only because Phil always ends up being top dog. As others have said, he shouldn't have carried on once he knew that Phil wasn't responsible. Max obviously took pleasure in it because he went to the prison himself to rub Phil's nose in it.
It's funny that he never questioned that Roxy was driving too fast, because I think she was. Surely her being the mother of his niece wouldn't stop him. |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 13,318
|
Quote:
My sympathy for Max is for the loss of the car lot, but only because Phil always ends up being top dog. As others have said, he shouldn't have carried on once he knew that Phil wasn't responsible. Max obviously took pleasure in it because he went to the prison himself to rub Phil's nose in it.
It's funny that he never questioned that Roxy was driving too fast, because I think she was. Surely her being the mother of his niece wouldn't stop him. |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,633
|
it's Ben's attitude that's annoying, sitting up on his mighty high horse as if he was the one that resolved the whole archers issue, when in fact he is just a dumb, devious little boy that has done nothing good in his life
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,444
|
Quote:
Same here but that's because; a) Car Lot belonged to Max and Phil had no right to take it. Two wrongs don't make a right and b) Max now has no job.
Phil has taken it because of some misguided sense that the Mitchells should own it because they did before. Jack conned it out of Phil I believe so that may have been a factor, but as you say, two wrongs don't make a right and Max is no more responsible for it than Dot is that Nick cut the brakes; someone's family is not accountable for their actions. I wonder how much longer the Mitchells will think they can throw people out of a pub they don't own. |
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: London Town
Posts: 8,791
|
I know people on here hate the fact that Phil always has to win (it is a little annoying to be fair), but I'd rather see Phil winning that down and out. A broke Phil Mitchell? No thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 69,009
|
Quote:
I know people on here hate the fact that Phil always has to win (it is a little annoying to be fair), but I'd rather see Phil winning that down and out. A broke Phil Mitchell? No thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Master of all fit EE males
Posts: 6,526
|
Quote:
I know people on here hate the fact that Phil always has to win (it is a little annoying to be fair), but I'd rather see Phil winning that down and out. A broke Phil Mitchell? No thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 13,318
|
Quote:
He needs to be broke imo. This bully attitude he has gone on far too long and has turned Phil into a panto character. Phil being paralyed permamently would be a brilliantly storyline I think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: London
Posts: 16,810
|
Max and Phil are as bad as each other, I like Max though
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 13:02.




