Sorry about thatscotmum wrote:David, thank you for posting, albeit I am a bit confused. I really do appreciate your offer of help but thought we had already gone through the initial stages of same:
I sent an email to you on 17th november from my yahoo account, giving all the details including my username at SP and, as you asked, and also attaching copies of my previous correspondence with SP. Then, some days later, as I was uncertain if you had received this, I sent you a PM via this site saying
"although I do not want to pressurise you for an outcome, I was wondering if you had receive the email I sent to you last Thursday regarding the ongoing problem I have with SP that you have kindly offered to try and help with ( from my email address xxx)? If not, please let me know and I will forward a copy. It really is appreciated that you have offered to help.
You replied by PM to me on this site on Wed Nov 23, 2005 at 10:44 pm and said:
"Got it...... away from home at the moment on very urgent business, but will ensure that I handle this over the weekend ........"
I assumed with December being a busy month for most folks, that you hadn't had the opportunity to take the matter further, and, as you were offering to help as a usergroup member and were not in any way obliged to be doing this for me, I didn't want to hound you.
Please repeat your email to me on 106200.1510@compuserve.com
David
, it all adds to the challenge and enjoyment of family research 
...feeling like a little tiny fish in an enormous sea. Eagerly read the minutes of the 9th UGM....lots of great stuff planned....but no look-in for folks like me who still have problems with the rogue 'Renfrew' issue. Lots of my previous searches have been corrupted and I cannot access many of them 
, it would be great to see problems like this, which have now been ongoing for months, being resolved.