How many more victims before their precious 2nd amendment rights are curbed at last? Oh, hang on, never, it's a vote loser, any presidential candidate taking a slightly less than 100% pro-gun stance in the US never gets anywhere. The gun lobby is all powerful in the US. Sorry, the line "guns dont' kill people, people kill people" is getting harder and harder to swallow at each new massacre, not that I ever saw it as so much sanctimonious babble before anyway.

Bloody hell, this thread is like Groundshog Day at times! ... Well, that's one thread thoroughly derailed by now!!! Or should I say hijacked, what with all the Airplane references?

I think Barclays may be up to their old tricks, or should I say a new trick, which may be pocketing them a lot of fees. Background: I have 2 Barclays account, one with a small o/d of £200 + Reserve of £300, one with a massive mortgage-linked o/draft. Because the household income & outgoings fluctuates, never twice the same date or amounts, I check my current account every morning, without fail. If the money coming out takes me into the Reserve, I immediately transfer some money from the mortgage account to put me back under so I don't incur the dreaded £22 Reserve fee. Bear in mind that Barclays says that if you go back under the Reserve before the end of the working day they won't charge you the fee, this is important. This has worked beautifully for years now and apart from a maybe once-a-year blip where I couldn't get to the account in time (illness, travel etc), I have had no charges whatsoever. However... For a few weeks now, I seem to have slipped more than usual, straying and staying in the Reserve, not because I haven't paid money in, but because somehow I seem not to have put enough to bring me back under. Odd, right? but ok, I am no maths genius, and I am on heavy medications, so I thought it was me losing it, swore at myself and thought of tackling the unfairness of the charges at some point in the future but nothing urgent, kind of thing... So I got more careful and still it happened. By then, my suspicions got worse, but again my memory can play tricks on me. Last week, I was certain I had put enough and I still ended up over when I checked the next day. So yesterday, I took a screenshot in the morning, which shows I was just over the £200 limit and I've transferred £20 over to make it under. That's it, no other transactions. (Remember that card transactions, cheques, d/d etc, ALL get taken out at about 2 am that day, which is where they used to get you with o/d charges that even if you went in at 9am to pay money in, the'd already have bounced the transactions?). This morning, screenshot. THREE card transactions have appeared on yesterday's date, putting me in the Reserve by nearly £100. BUSTED! Soooooooooooo.... I'm going to give it a few days, do a few more screenshots proving that Barclays are being very naughty, and then get the whole lot back, even the ones where it may have been me at fault then again it may not have been, who knows how long they've been doing this, hoping that most people wouldn't cotton on and blame themselves instead? I will of course keep you updated, but meanwhile if you too have thought Alzheimer's was setting in early, you might want to double-check your statements. For me, it will be easy as I can show where I transferred money every time and still somehow managed to not pay enough to put me back under the line.

Sorry, late into this thread, but have just read the 15 pages of it now, and didn't notice anyone posting this link, which is the most "ewwww" moment of all... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIx_b41wzbs

Bloody hell, this thread is like Groundshog Day at times!

Bloody hell, this thread is like Groundshog Day at times!

Nonsense. a) British nationals can and do use other countries' health services, the system is called the reciprocal agreement within EEC countries, the documents used to be an E111, it's not an EHIC card but does the same thing: Any UK resident can have the same level of treatment in any member country as the locals, and the bill gets sent to the DWP in Newcastle. b) ... Only because their funds are being strangled pre-privatisation, it doesn't matter who uses it, it's all about the funding. There is no reason the NHS couldn't get UNlimited funding apart from the determination of this government to finish the job thatcher started. If the politicos would stop treating the NHS as a money-making (or losing) scheme and instead treat it as it is meant to be: free healthcare at the point of access equally for everyone, the NHS wouldn't be dying right now. But oh no, it has to be profitable! Not just self-sufficient, mind, no, make a profit. Well, b***x to that. c) Oh, I was wondering how long it would be before that came up. So what? Are you saying that non-white Brits have fewer rights to healthcare than the white ones? d) That sentence doesn't even make sense, so I won't try to decipher it. e) How many generations? a generation is 25 years, so what are we talking about here? Does that mean that Prince Phillip can't get treated on here any more? (not that I necessarily would disagree with this particular one, lol) Or his children, foreign mongrels that they are? for that matter, how far do we go back as far as the royals are concerned, bloody germans...?

Copy of that document is now saved in triplicate, that is glorious! :-D If ever people wondered why Cameron wants to get rid of FOIs, this is a perfect example as to why, lol!

That is completely spot on. One of the most thought provoking of these, IMO, is related to charity. In%, poorer people give massively more to charity than richer ones. This is the most recent study on this, US based. The UK-based research is much older (2001), but the conclusion can be drawn that this is an ongoing situation and therefore not a societal fluke.

Thanks, yes I completely understand the reason of how and why it's happened. My niggles are really about the legality of the way it is done. As you say, it "appears" that a LO has been granted... yet there is no LO number on the letter anywhere. It would "appear" that Croydon have sub-contracted the company, yes, but it is unclear what exactly are the company's boundaries. If there is no LO for example, are they not breaking the law by saying there is and trying to coerce the person in paying? It's all very well the council sub-contracting, but does the sub-contractor have any actual right to threaten a FINE for refusal to give the info to them, a private contractor? Do you see what I mean? Like when one gets a letter from a DCA that says that they are collecting a debt on behalf of x company but really bought it wholesale for pennies, when they say they "might" take one to court, that they "could" obtain all kind of charging orders and what not when really they can do no such thing unless they comply with a whole load of regulations but they just try to bully people into paying. That's what I'm driving at. Anyway, thanks for all the answers, I think I'll just let it go for now as I have enough problems of my own to deal with at the moment. (none of them to deal with council tax for once, lol)

Who'd have listened, in the hysteria of global the economic meltdown? This isn't news, some - many - of us have been trying to be heard for years but with the Murdoch press on the side of the Tories, what chance did we have to be listened to?

God no, not my problem as it were! I'm sending the letter back with a terse "cease and desist" and that's as far as it goes, I was just intrigued as to whether this was another con trying to convince poor souls to pay where they don't have to, that's all. Remember that's how it started with debt collectors and the likes of RLP, pretending to have rights over us when they didn't. Maybe I'm just paranoid. (which does't mean they're not all up to no good!)

Well no, that's the point. The tories have only been able to pass these devastating new laws because they had the LDs voting on these with them. If they had ruled as a minority party, none of it would have passed. Would this country be worse off for it? Absolutely not. Well, I'm off to cheer up a friend who's just lost the motability car she uses for her Down's, autistic and Tourette's, violent 16 years old because DLA hasn't sorted his claim out, and as a consequence, her Income Support has stopped too and now the council is also telling her she should be paying £61 a week rent... Nothing she can do until Monday of course, she is devastated right now, so I'm off to make her tea and feed her cake and telling her dirty jokes, that's all I can do for now. Have a great week-end all!

Thank you, Antone, that is of course what I meant, sorry I thought it was obvious from the links! Taken out of context and as a standalone sentence, it would seem an odd thing to say, I agree... Maybe reading the whole post would help in the first place.

Well said. I am not that naive, I am well aware that Labour are now targeting the "crips vote" to ride back to power in the same way the Tories have always relied on the "grey vote" to shore them up. That's fine by me. We know that the Tories, with or without the Libdems, will carry on with this class pogrom, so even if Labour are using us, as long as we get some results out of it, I do not see any other alternative, frankly. Do I trust either party? No. Am I happy with Labour as they are? No. But they are not all the same, and voting the Tories back in would be the biggest mistakes any of us could make in our lifetime, or our children's lifetime for that matter. The way I see it, we have at last a chance to put pressure on Labour to get things done the way we'd like (or at least in the right direction), it's up to us to make sure that we get some concessions for our continued support rather than the current "well, I'll have to vote for them anyway as they're the least worse of all". Quite simple, really.

Hellooooooooooooooooooooo???? Is anyone actually reading anything linked here? the coffers were NOT depleted. There was NO "spending spree". And while we're at it, there was NO note saying "there is no money left" left behind when the tories got in, come on people use your brains here! The deficit is a myth. The "need" for austerity is a myth, and ideological, not based on facts nor proper economics. Come on, who do you believe, the Daily Mail or: The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development + The International Monetary Fund + The Office for Budget Responsibility + Her Majesty's Treasury + The Office for National Statistics ... oh, and the current Chancellor of the Exchequer, finally trapped in his own lies? I post the link again: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ramesh-patel/growth-cameron-austerity_b_2007552.html Please read it if you haven't yet. If that doesn't open your eyes, nothing will, but repeating the old lies won't make it true, not now, not ever.

I really don't think that talking about the coalition is "splitting hair" Simon, in fact, it's at the heart of the mess we're in now. If the LDs had held on to their principles instead of selling themselves for a crumb of power, NONE, not ONE of these devastating "reforms" would have come to pass. And the reality is that no, the majority of us did NOT vote for those who are right now destroying the very social frame of this country. The majority were fed up with Labour (not so much because of the economy than because of the Iraq war as it goes), they also didn't really want the tories back in power, and they sure as hell weren't prepared to let the unknown quantity that were the LD have a go, so they kind of dithered, voted tactically, wasted their vote, not really wanting to commit one way or another. As Ian Hislop so beautifully put it at the time: "the country has SPOKEN... and it said 'meh'..."

Someone somewhere had unprotected sex. Woop-di-doo.

Thief! That's Stewart Francis material that is!

No-one?

I'm confused, you say higher up: "set aside hearing is 12th December; I received notification of the hearing at 3pm on Friday 7th November", or did you mean December? If yes, you could always register your unhappiness, but I can't see it will do you much good nor change the outcome. If it were me, I'd bite the bullet and just accept that courts work in mysterious ways and that us mere mortals have little to say about it.

You're the closest! That took some searching, but I knew i had saved that post somewhere for a reason! "Thanks to Bankfodder: Bear Garden is used to describe a place where noisy riotous behaviour goes on - and is permitted. What you may not know is that there is an area in the Royal Courts of Justice in the Strand which is actually called The Bear Garden. It is the place where for 150 years it has been used as an area where opponents - lawyers and clients would meet each other and negotiate last minute settlements before going in for the trial. I can imagine that it got pretty heated and pretty noisy. It s still used for meetings but I can imagine that it is much calmer nowadays."

I know it won't be much consolation, but the set-aside is likely to be granted whether you attend or not (over-riding objective being that both sides should get given a chance to put their case to the court). Bear in mind that you can send a submission to explain why you don't think it should be granted, but a) the judge is unlikely to pay attention as per above, b) according to CPR you should have sent any relevant documentation at least 7 days before the hearing so the judge doesn't legally have to take it into account. No harm in registering your objections anyway, just don't put too much hope in succeeding in blocking this one, and concentrate on winning the next stage instead.

I have to say, this is the first time I have ever seen this most amazing attempt to lift millions of people out of poverty described in such a cynical manner. Next you'll be telling us that the minimum wage was also just a ploy to get themselves re-elected? Well, you know what? Works for me. Sure, I'd rather see big bosses have to take a big pay cut and the small people get a living wage but sadly there isn't a party that has the balls to enforce this, so until that happens, yep, you're right, I'll keep on voting for the ones who gave me a chance to lift myself out of the poverty trap, the ones who ensure we wouldn't get £2 an hour for doing a backbreaking filthy job, the ones who try and make sure that the most disadvantaged in society don't have to wallow in misery for the rest of their lives. What I can't understand is why anyone else who's not a member of their tiny elite club wouldn't????