Although adding Directv, a technology smashed a fresh HP touchsmart pc. I submitted the state also it was rejected since the technology refused falling the pc and that I didn't individually observe him get it done though I noticed the accident. A consultant in the workplace of the leader named to express the problem didn't sleep with Directv since it wasn't them-but their insurance provider that refused the state. Even though it was their technology adding their item that triggered the harm, they claim they're not responsible. Is the fact that correct? Could you suggest a training course of motion?
0 comments