Jump to content

My Real Name

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    739
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by My Real Name

  1. That's great news - What will the parameters for your research be?
  2. How can I make those assertions if there is no evidence to support them? Has squalene been used in vaccines before, by the way.
  3. You must have misunderstood me - I was looking for actual empirical evidence, so that I could support your assertions. As opposed to a string of articles and anecdotes that just make the same assertions.
  4. This sounds interesting. Can you provide references to any evidence?
  5. Thompson.co.uk Booking Conditions Looks like unfair contract terms under the meaning of UTCCRs / UCTA. Perhaps someone with familiarity of the Acts could point out any relevant sections. To be honest, a lot of the Ts & Cs appear to be unfair: So they can change the contract as and when they like?
  6. Surely that would only be on the basis of the clamper's action being negligent. If the clamper's actions are in the course of the clamper's duty, I fail to see how their employer is anything but liable. If the landowner had done due diligence, they would have not employed the clamper in the first place.
  7. At the moment, it's impossible to tell, as the OP has not given us enough information.
  8. What did the sticker say? Do you still have the sticker? Did you ever receive any correspondence from TEC (Traffic Enforcement Centre)? Did the bailiffs produce any paperwork?
  9. Did you ever receive an NTO (Notice to Owner) or any other correspondence?
  10. From a discussion on Arthur versus Anker: Consider the medieval definition of distress damage feasant - A landowner seizes the sheep grazing (and damaging) his field. It is up to the owner, not the shepherd, to pay for their return. The owner might then choose to seek recompense from the shepherd - similarly, the registered keeper might seek recompense from the driver.
  11. No. Other than write a few letters? Probably not.
  12. Does this mean that we are about to endure another visit from some dull witted troll, spouting the same old clichéd and trite fallacies?
  13. Akamai Technologies are a global business. Even the White House website is hosted on Akamai tin. I might be concerned about the lack of a valid security certificate for the dgt.es site. I would ignore the letter. Is there any reciprocal / unilateral agreement with Spain with regards payment of fines? Do their fines have any authority in the UK?
  14. Do you have any terms and conditions / contracts that you can read through? [Edit] Plus what Conniff wrote.
  15. I was thinking more along the lines of being contributory to the damage caused. Whether or not it's an applicable principle is up for debate. I'm just pointing out that the principle exists, and might be applicable. Either way, I would counsel the OP to leave it to their insurers.
  16. I'm not sure how they can send an NTO if they don't have the correct registration. You didn't give them any details of your name and / or address, or the correct registration, did you?
  17. There is the notion of contributory negligence, which might impact the amount of damages awarded.
  18. Is this an actual Penalty Charge Notice? In which case, the offence never occurred. Is this a privately issued "ticket"? In which case, ignore it completely.
  19. What were the terms of the contract for the photos? The credit agreement is separate from this.
  20. Have they actually stated what the infringing designs are? Are the designs actually infringing?
  21. Are these not the same people? I smell a troll.
  22. I would be inclined not to bother, as it is pretty much out of you sister's hands. Answer any questions that the insurance company might have, and let them deal with it.
×
×
  • Create New...