Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yeah, I would confirm that anyway, as there is a separate sheet where I have to put in those details and my insurance number and driving licence number. That is on page 2 (page one is their allegations) then page three is a statement that you weren't the driver and space to give details who was driving. Page 4 is an empty sheet for a statement to explain the situation. So I will fill out my details as the driver on page 2, admitting I was driving at the time, and then attach my statement as above as a separate sheet. That should hopefully do it at this stage
    • Fraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm.View the full article
    • Seems OK, except that you must provide your details (as the driver). Include your name, address, DOB and driving licence number. This is to comply with s172 of the Road Traffic Act. Keep a copy and get a free Certificate of Posting from the Post Office.
    • Dear all, some information/advice required please.   I recently received a Further Steps Notice about a fine from 19/03/2018 which I knew nothing about. It was regarding a vehicle parked on the street without tax ( It was covered up and there because the only key to it had been stolen, I had been away from home  and I was having trouble getting a new key cut and coded to the vehicle )  I had not made a change of address to DVLA which would be why I knew nothing about the fine until receiving the final steps notice dated 29th April 2024 and giving me 10 working days to pay, although the notice did not arrive till May 9th 2024. I emailed the London Collection and Compliance Centre on May 13th 2024 asking for any information and they sent me a copy of the original fine. It is for  £390 back vehicle tax, £85 cost and £600 fine.  I now have received a Notice of Enforcement dated 7th June 2024 demanding payment ( total £1036)  or an arrangement by 6am 15th June ( tomorrow )  My question is is it tool late now to question the £600 fine part of the total amount to be paid ? That amount seems punitive.  Would making a statuary declaration regarding having no knowledge of the original court date apply ? And any other advice gratefully received. I am on Universal Credit and apparently they have already taken £177 via benefit reductions which I wasn’t aware of, but does make it seem strange that they were also unable to contact me.    Many thanks for any assistance 
    • Fraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm.View the full article
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

THE Election - Made your mind up yet ??


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5115 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

"Eaxctly" is going to be a tricky one to name them all... Let's try all the people in Africa dying of AIDS because he forbids the use of condoms. For starters. He may no be wielding the knife himself, but as head of state, the bucks stops with him.

 

I think that's a wee bit tenuous to say the least. You could use the same argument here over people refused life-saving drugs. The buck stops with the Prime Minster over the use of public money. Does that make every British Prime Minister a murderer?

 

I know it's not quite as simple as this, but this is a religion we're talking about and people can choose to follow it or not.

 

Fred

Before you criticise another man you should first walk a mile in his shoes. Then, when you criticise him, you'll be a mile away and he won't have any shoes on.

 

Don't get me confused with somebody knowledgeable by all those green blobs. I got most of them by making people laugh.

 

I am not European, I am English.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

"Eaxctly" is going to be a tricky one to name them all... Let's try all the people in Africa dying of AIDS because he forbids the use of condoms. For starters. He may no be wielding the knife himself, but as head of state, the bucks stops with him.

 

Did you say, Condoms or Condems?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What an astonishing comment to make on the, worldwide web!

 

I think that may have been tongue-in-cheek AC.

Before you criticise another man you should first walk a mile in his shoes. Then, when you criticise him, you'll be a mile away and he won't have any shoes on.

 

Don't get me confused with somebody knowledgeable by all those green blobs. I got most of them by making people laugh.

 

I am not European, I am English.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, lets turn this on it's head a little... Why wont Pope Benedict XVI talk to the autorities over his alleged cover-up of sexual abuse in the Catholic church?

Oh, and just in case anyone missed this fact; the invitation was extended by Gordon Brown.
I personally don't care who invited him, I just think he needs to face justice.

If in doubt, contact a qualified insured legal professional (or my wife... she knows EVERYTHING)

 

Or send a cheque or postal order payable to Reclaim the Right Ltd.

to

923 Finchley Road London NW11 7PE

 

 

Click here if you fancy an email address that shows you mean business! (only £6 and that will really help CAG)

 

If you can't donate, please use the Internet Search boxes on the CAG pages - these will generate a small but regular income for the site

 

Please also consider using the

C.A.G. Toolbar

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that's a wee bit tenuous to say the least. You could use the same argument here over people refused life-saving drugs. The buck stops with the Prime Minster over the use of public money. Does that make every British Prime Minister a murderer?

 

I know it's not quite as simple as this, but this is a religion we're talking about and people can choose to follow it or not.

 

Fred

It is not tenuous at ALL!!! :shock:

 

Exactly, it IS a religion we're talking about, and unlike a prime minister whose edicts are NOT laws, what the Pope says IS the word of God for practising catholics. If he says "no condoms", then it means that a good catholic doesn't use them. Simple as.

 

Far from tenuous, it is the largest cause of AIDS failing to be contained and it lies exclusively at the feet of the catholic church and therefore the Pope.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not tenuous at ALL!!! :shock:

 

Exactly, it IS a religion we're talking about, and unlike a prime minister whose edicts are NOT laws, what the Pope says IS the word of God for practising catholics. If he says "no condoms", then it means that a good catholic doesn't use them. Simple as.

 

Far from tenuous, it is the largest cause of AIDS failing to be contained and it lies exclusively at the feet of the catholic church and therefore the Pope.

 

[edited by me]

 

Is the spread of AIDS caused by people having sex outside marriage?

Edited by Fred Bassett

Before you criticise another man you should first walk a mile in his shoes. Then, when you criticise him, you'll be a mile away and he won't have any shoes on.

 

Don't get me confused with somebody knowledgeable by all those green blobs. I got most of them by making people laugh.

 

I am not European, I am English.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[edited by me]

 

Is the spread of AIDS caused by people having sex outside marriage?

 

:

It is now generally accepted that HIV is a descendant of a Simian Immunodeficiency Virus because certain strains of SIVs bear a very close resemblance to HIV-1 and HIV-2, the two types of HIV.

 

HIV-2 for example corresponds to SIVsm, a strain of the Simian Immunodeficiency Virus found in the sooty mangabey (also known as the White-collared monkey), which is indigenous to western Africa.

 

The more virulent, pandemic strain of HIV, namely HIV-1, was until recently more difficult to place. Until 1999, the closest counterpart that had been identified was SIVcpz, the SIV found in chimpanzees. However, this virus still had certain significant differences from HIV.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not forgetting also that, we live in a multi-cultural society of all faiths and creeds.

Very important to be tolerant of all faiths, whether you believe or, Not!

 

As for labelling the 'Pope' as a murderer, that is preposterous.

 

Booky, does love the word 'Condom' and it impication(s) LOL?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Or brainwashed from a very early age.

 

I think all religion sucks.

 

I wouldn't quite agree, but some people can take it too far.

 

A long time ago I worked in a pub on the river in Hammersmith. The Landlord was an Irishman who used to bring lads over from Belfast to work and he housed them too. This was at the height of 'The Troubles'. Every night after we had cleared up, we used to have a couple of pints and a game of pool. One night, one of the Belfast lads asked me what religion I was. I replied that I wasn't really sure (I wasn't either because it was no big thing in my house). He turned to his mate and said "see what I mean?". When I asked him what he was on about he told me that where they came from you could get shot for giving the wrong answer, whereas in England nobody gave a stuff.

 

That little episode still makes me think and I doubt that I'll ever fully understand the significance of religion in some people's lives.

 

That's why I find it so hard to understand why people can't say "sod the Pope, I'm using a condom". Perhaps Bookie is right, much as I hate to say it.

 

Fred

Before you criticise another man you should first walk a mile in his shoes. Then, when you criticise him, you'll be a mile away and he won't have any shoes on.

 

Don't get me confused with somebody knowledgeable by all those green blobs. I got most of them by making people laugh.

 

I am not European, I am English.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The origin of AIDS and HIV has puzzled scientists ever since the illness first came to light in the early 1980s. For over twenty years it has been the subject of fierce debate and the cause of countless arguments, with everything from a promiscuous flight attendant to a suspect vaccine programme being blamed. So what is the truth? Just where did AIDS come from?

 

The first recognised cases of AIDS occurred in the USA in the early 1980s (more about this period can be found on our History of AIDS page). A number of gay men in New York and California suddenly began to develop rare opportunistic infections and cancers that seemed stubbornly resistant to any treatment. At this time, AIDS did not yet have a name, but it quickly became obvious that all the men were suffering from a common syndrome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As for labelling the 'Pope' as a murderer, that is preposterous.
Spoken like a true Catholic.

 

Booky, does love the word 'Condom' and it impication(s) LOL?

Do I? :-? Ok, if you say so... :-? *

 

 

 

 

 

 

*if someone knows what she means, please explain it to me, because I have NO idea!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Huh??? :confused: :confused: :confused:

 

Don't be confused. What I'm getting at here is that if the spread of AIDS is caused by sex outside of Marriage, then why are people ignoring one papal edict but adhering to another one?

 

Anyway, I've since, begrudgingly, almost, partially, somewhat, with gritted teeth, very reluctantly, much though it pains me, nearly agreed with you on something.

 

Fred

Before you criticise another man you should first walk a mile in his shoes. Then, when you criticise him, you'll be a mile away and he won't have any shoes on.

 

Don't get me confused with somebody knowledgeable by all those green blobs. I got most of them by making people laugh.

 

I am not European, I am English.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't quite agree, but some people can take it too far.

 

A long time ago I worked in a pub on the river in Hammersmith. The Landlord was an Irishman who used to bring lads over from Belfast to work and he housed them too. This was at the height of 'The Troubles'. Every night after we had cleared up, we used to have a couple of pints and a game of pool. One night, one of the Belfast lads asked me what religion I was. I replied that I wasn't really sure (I wasn't either because it was no big thing in my house). He turned to his mate and said "see what I mean?". When I asked him what he was on about he told me that where they came from you could get shot for giving the wrong answer, whereas in England nobody gave a stuff.

 

That little episode still makes me think and I doubt that I'll ever fully understand the significance of religion in some people's lives.

 

That's why I find it so hard to understand why people can't say "sod the Pope, I'm using a condom". Perhaps Bookie is right, much as I hate to say it.

 

Fred

 

Yes, the troubles in Ireland and Eira; Republic of, have been shockingly sad:(

 

by Fred Basset:

That's why I find it so hard to understand why people can't say "sod the Pope, I'm using a condom".

 

Many RC's do in the UK, Fred.

Again, their choice!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think rape of children in South Africa (and other African countries) probably has more to do with the spread of Aids than the Pope banning condoms.

 

And, as AC says, many practising Catholics do use contraception in the UK and their priests know about it.

 

It's well documented that in African countries men do not want to use condoms, and Aids wouldn't be spread about so much if they kept it in their trousers. Please don't say that they are soooo concerned about what the Pope thinks of their not using condoms.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As for labelling the 'Pope' as a murderer, that is preposterous.

 

 

 

PM me your address AC, I will send you some of my medication.:D

 

 

If all else fails, kick them where it hurts and SOD'EM;)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, just another thought:

 

I've never seen one of these UK women who has an enormous number of children, gets an enormous house, demands an even bigger one, and gets so much money in benefits that they can afford four wide-screen televisions, wiis, gameboys, and so on, say that she has all these children because she can't use contraception because she's "a practising Catholic".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't be confused. What I'm getting at here is that if the spread of AIDS is caused by sex outside of Marriage, then why are people ignoring one papal edict but adhering to another one?

 

Anyway, I've since, begrudgingly, almost, partially, somewhat, with gritted teeth, very reluctantly, much though it pains me, nearly agreed with you on something.

 

Fred

LOL, so graciously done... :razz:

 

But, just in case you were still wondering, remember that in quite a few countries, systematic rape of the women is an additional way of subjugating the enemy. Woman gets infected by rapist, passes it on to unborn child(ren), infects non-condom wearing husband, dies. Husband remarries, infects next woman, who infects unborn child(ren) etc, etc... Multiply the problem by thousands and thousands.... :-(

 

And before anyone says the above scenario is ludicrous, I am deeply sorry to say that it is not. I'm sure people have consensual non marital sex all over the world, whatever their religion. But the matter of systematic rape and subsequent endemic AIDS infections is a matter of record.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...