Mmmmm I'm the one "rambling on"?

Hysterical!

Your life is that devoid of meaning, huh?

I am sure they order the money refunds,,as this was def a scam, and agree hopefully she always have that tag.

Still keeping the revenge fantasy alive, I see.

It's getting to be quite an old endeavour!

Do you know what?

I don't like dog acts ( I like dogs) although Jules' team is better than most imho.

I thought using a 3 legged dog for a sympathy vote was a cheap trick and a bit vomit inducing.

I wanted other people to win

I don't vote because although I don't think the vote count is rigged obvious bias goes into promoting the chances of certain acts.


and yet


I can accept that Jules and Matisse won as fairly as any act has ever won. If there was any deliberate "scam" it wasn't watertight enough (all reasons already given time and time over in this thread) by the standards BGT could produce.

Move along nothing to see here ........unless if you're unhappy with this then ignore all similar talent/reality shows

How sad that you find legal due process designed to protect decent people from being scammed, an act of revenge.

Shall we only apply the law to people you don't like and let off anyone you do? - Yup that about as fair as a dog act on BGT.

Of course it is. We've yet to find anyone who actually voted for the dog act who feels "scammed", so your desire to protect them seems to be motivated by some entirely less noble objective.

You may not have found them, but that was most of the complaints to Ofcom of people who felt that they had been scammed, and spent money for a vote for ONE dog

You revived a thread that was finally dying.

You have access to the text of the complaints?

Where can I read them?

Newspaper report....
Ofcom has launched an investigation into whether Britain's Got Talent viewers were misled by winning stunt dog act Jules and Matisse.

Some 1,150 complaints were made after it emerged Jules O'Dwyer's dog Matisse had not performed a tightrope stunt because he did not like heights.

O'Dwyer's other dog, Chase, was used instead.

A spokesperson for Ofcom confirmed it would look into whether viewers of the ITV show were misled about the competition.
We've opened an investigation to determine whether viewers of ITV's Britain's Got Talent final, who may have paid money to vote, were misled about the competition

– OFCOM

So, as I suspected, you have no idea what the complaints actually were, or who made them. But that won't stop you pretending to know, or from continuing your absurd campaign of vilification.

[I always check claims that look implausible, and so had already visited the Ofcom website, looking for data that you might have been able to find in support of your claim. Needless to say, I didn't find any.]

Does OFCOM have a rule saying that you must have voted in order to make a complaint?

I highly doubt it.

If there was an intention to deceive surely they would have given both dogs the same name collar, and just kept quiet about it.

And she keeped quiet after and she brought only one dog out! Funny that.

Hilarious. Especially the effect it had on some people with nothing better to think about.

Every time this thread finally starts dying those with a grudge against Jules start it up again.

We need to come to terms with a fraud winning, cos they won't do anything now.

Hope she sleeps well at night, knowing that she conned the nation into voting for a fraud. She got what she wanted - she won the prize money, and a chance to perform on The Royal Variety - all it cost, was her integrity.

It's a shame, cos I thought she came across as a decent person, but I am so glad I didn't vote for her now.

Yes, isn't it funny how the only people who incessantly whine about being defrauded by some trivial non-event are the people who didn't spend any money (or even any of their precious time on the free app) voting for her?

Why, it's almost as though they were sore losers!

That a strange view, so if someone you know has a crime against them, and you join in with a view about it, are you a sore loser, please remember she won 1/4 million pounds, part funded by the phone calls. With a lot of them believing it was one dog only.

I agree, even if she keeps the title, I hope she has a guilt feeling, she not even said sorry.

Nor should she, not having done anything wrong.

I'm glad that she doesn't feel obliged to pander to the whims of the perpetually disgruntled, who strive to make everything just that little bit worse.

I almost did. Not that it's got anything to do with my favorite act not winning the show.

She's a con artist who conned fellow BGT viewers.

If your cool with that, then fair enough, but that doesn't mean the rest of us should be.

Of course they won't act because she didn't commit a fraud, she had an act. It was a piece of entertainment, a bit of fluff of no consequence or importance.

The world is going to Hell in a handcart and this - this? - is all people can bleat about? A month after it happened? Have you any idea how absurd that is...?

She has nothing to apologise for.