133 If you need to change lane, first use your mirrors and if necessary take a quick sideways glance to make sure you will not force another road user to change course or speed. When it is safe to do so, signal to indicate your intentions to other road users and when clear, move over. 137 On a two-lane dual carriageway you should stay in the left-hand lane. Use the right-hand lane for overtaking or turning right. After overtaking, move back to the left-hand lane when it is safe to do so. Technically it's still single carriageway. I could throw reversal situation here. When dual goes into single (merging) and middle broken line finishes, way before, car in front is privileged although looking from your point of view it's changing lane. That's why I'm asking specifically in this situation, to habe a clear understanding, whenever this situation occur (as it doesn't apply to my initial problem).

I record all calls. I say call is recorded when I feel I want to say that call is recorded.

There is no simple problems, otherwise we wouldn't need bunch of lawyers or consumer forums for that matter. We all have different approach as we live different lives. Therefore I don't give simple answers [apart from soft/hard configuration - this is straightforward] I prefer open approach; as I indicated in first post it is for someone in my shoes. If someone is happy with my approach can use it as it - most likely - didn't cost me as much time as going to court [plus all the other downsides for average Joe]. If anyone have any questions in that mater, there is always space and time to elaborate. ! addendum: to send encrypted files from computer to one of the popular cloud storages one can use open source Cryptomator [Linux, Windows, iOS]. This way files locally will stay unencrypted but in cloud/internet/server they will be unrecognisable.

I can add to this thread how it happened. Since I have had all the conversations with company [when I said I record and when I didn't say] I called them to make amendments, but this time I was mentioning that it's being recorded. I fact there was no promises that they will call but forgot about it, they called me with new deal proposal when I didn't ask, finally I had this feeling they didn't want it to go to court, which I have promised based not only on failed service but also on really outrageous calls that that I was having in the meantime - being also close to [misleading-and-aggressive-selling-rights-consumer-protection-amendment-regulations-2014-guidance]. So I think that saying warning at the beginning of a call is part of a strategy one wants to apply. For the software/hardware bit. Backing up is usually a little pain. I have an Android phone that uses ACR for recording [it's starts automatically, but can be set not to record calls form certain numbers - for example from certain Phone Book entries] it registers the date, time, and number of call in file name so it's simple to find one later. Also version I use is free [or was when I got it first time]. Then If you have laptop, PC, RaspberryPi at home you can install SyncMe Wireless on the phone [also free] to transfer automatically recorded files across wireless network and choose to leave original on the handset or not. Same way you can back it up to more then one location on the home network. It would be a good idea to have it all encrypted as phone calls include your most sensitive data and voice samples! The simplest way would be to have it encrypted within a system you use. So BitLocker on Windows or native encryption on some Linux distributions [Mint for example]. Otherwise VeraCrypt [free even for companies] can be used. Unfortunate most people will not know how solid grounds for any court case will they have - even having every single call. Or will they be able to beat the opposition, or how much is the cost and how much is the maximum [in case if it drags?], or will they get return of the cost if they win. There is plenty going through a head of ordinary citizen, even if they've managed to get recorder.

Did he say "no" to do "do you mind" or "can I record"? but it doesn't really translate do the same rights to us customers. Doesn't it? Which I think is co incredibly ridiculous! Yes there are situations , where I would not announce I record. Hospital would be one of them or where dependency on service would be to high and I couldn't afford time delay. But generally information at the beginning of conversation could just put off all this aggressive salesmen and them bs technique offering something they can't provide. To answer one of the first questions: as I mentioned, before I said above formula, I was disconnected twice by customer service so I made them offer if they don't want to talk again, transfer me to manager. Simple. This way I can find out is it company policy or way of avoiding personal responsibility.

Indeed I was reading the warning /advice on the forum to record but it doesn't say why someone should regret not recording. Is it because you can go back and listen to conversation, use it in courts? Second isn't after all clear atvall. Now I can't honestly understand why it should undermine the value of recording? I'm recording automatically my CS conversations for ages now but changed a tactic to increase a chance to make it admissible. And today I only remember that there were cases that the value of recording was undermined by secrecy of deed. Also there is a factor of CS telling less bs on the phone for example during customer retention if they know what is going on. So the value of informing other part about it might also be time saving, as instead of chasing misleading contract you won't get one in the first place. As for why I'm not giving company name, it is to keep anonymous. Name will surface or surfaced different time, different place.

I didn't know where exactly to share that. So i thought I'll place it in the forum relevant to the situation that made me to write it. 2 ladies from consumer complaint service hunged up on me saying they won't talk to me if I won't switch off recording (yes I tell everyone at the beginning). So instead of changing my ways, I did that. I won't be saying witch mobile provider it was as I finished dealing with them now but wanted to share if someone is in the same shoes as me. It's open for edits as it was done in some 30 min.

Yes I did. In any case they would ask me to provide some documentation. Otherwise anyone could come and claim they didn't get something. For me situation is: council pays for service and there is a contract between RM an Council for it. Is there any reason for Royal Mail accepting my complaint if I don't have a shred of paperwork proving that letter was really sent and not stuck in a Council bin? Or stolen by a person that not supposed to be in a specific Council area?

I have written complaint to my local council that I haven't received few letters from them including one with PIN to 'Council Online' and other decision including some of my data and informations that if missed could bring further negative consequences. In response I have received letter through encrypted [?] means [egress]. It says that I should contact RoyalMail and chase why letters are not getting to me. Am I right that it is Council that is in the contract with RM and it's their job to find out what is going on and they trying to fob me off? What do you reckon I should do next? If I'm right that is. Thanks

So now I know I was misinformed on all occasions- apart from one. I was eligible all the time, but some companies don't deal with some type of situations. It took several calls to multiple energy companies, some of them few times, also it took about 3 calls to Energy Saving Trust [that I think is first point of contact in this situation - 0300 123 123 4 - and I think they are tax sponsored]. Finally latter told me that most Big energy companies deal with boilers if their efficiency falls below B GRADE and only some if it falls inside B GRADE. It happened that in the process, some companies were telling me that my boiler is X efficient, and other Z efficient. All of them [apart from one] were saying I'm not eligible, including money grabbers that always come at the top of search engine when you look for grant. And they should know the best. All this time I was suspicious why only one company decided to go trough with my application. For obvious reasons I wouldn't ask them 'Why?', as that could be conflict of interest. Gov website [gov energy-grants-calculator] is at least cryptic. It asks you questions, but it doesn't clarify anywhere why and what. It doesn't provide basic information for less skilled in information research and I can only suppose how many people were turned down by one company but would be eligible in other. Shame.

I'm OK with that, but that might be the reason I couldn't find any information about them. There is no clear connection in search engine between company and information about them. So now anyone looking for info will see - "they" are not approved but will not know who... Connection between [commercial] + [name] should actually work as anty-advertisement. In this case I can only add, this website will come on the first page in search engine [searching for: boiler + grant] and that they have many other websites too. Yes survey was done free, I can see new EPC for my property on a web [it took 10 minutes to survey]. My concern is not having it in writing, which I would ask for - indeed. I'm rather concerned I'm not eligible and agreeing for a deal that indeed is only offered to get rid of old or defective stock... since I'm not really eligible... as said by commercial company... I'm confused now... Yes I will call supplier.

I have applied for boiler grant through one of the big 6 energy companies. The subcontractor called and told me I can have boiler and installation if I contribute few hundreds of pounds, reduced from around £2000. Then I have applied through [removed] again - as first company didn't want to tell me what boiler exactly will I be getting. Not even output power... [removed] told me that I'm not eligible for grant at all as my current boiler is too effective [above 86%, but leaking]. I met all other conditions. I don't know what to think now. Is first subcontractor taking me for a ride, trying to flog some old type of boiler or maybe it is proven to be bad quality and maintenance cost will be high? I'm not giving names as I don't want to imply anything. PS - Am I right to think that '[removed]' is government and impartial?