Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you both for your time and comments.   I will try and scan / redact details tomorrow as got to go to work soon.   Having trouble with scanner at moment but if ok quite happy to DM details if need be.   Dx - Yeah regarding statements I thought that was normal to supply everything as per Subject Access Request? Should I go back to Vanquis to state this?
    • hi cant find old thread, had a capital on tap business card (new wave) defaulted dec 2019, quickly sold to Capquest, capquest then arrow were never able to prove the debt or provide a statement with losses, even admitting one doesnt exist after i complained (probably why it was sold on by original creditor)   that was beginning of last year, now they say its been transferred to drydens solicitors, in a letter i received to day, so what can i expect  i really thought this had gone away , without any proof of loss they cant go to court surely? and they 'own' drydens, so its hardly been transferred out of arrow    
    • Whatever else you do, do not reveal who was driving.  It may be that the first PCN was not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act  2012 which prevents the parking crooks from transferring the alleged debt from the driver to the keeper. If the keeper is not liable therefore, the last thing to do is to reveal who was driving.   Moving on to the  13 minutes over time, we should be able to get over that fairly easily so all you have to do is get their paperwork done in time and the rest should be fairly easy. UK Parking Control probably aren't the worst parking company. in the world but if the worst one was to close down, I'd be worried if I was UK PC.   In the meantime could you please get  the questionnaire on post 5 completed so that we can give you and your friend the best help and get him out of having to pay a penny.    
    • Sigh. Another “ohh, I’ll post something sexy, that I don’t really understand”.   it works in theory. it works in practice, in limited and specific circumstances.   it FAILS in practice if you don’t know what you are doing. Shadows. Exposure from the contaminated items while setting up the decontamination run.   So, the item(s) must be physically clean. Dirt? Creates a shadow, that the organism can be protected from the UVC.   Irregular shape of item to be disinfected? risk of shadows, shadows -> organism can be protected from the UVC.   When SARS-CoV first ‘hit’, there were sites using UVC to decontaminate FFP3 masks for re-use (as the masks were in such short supply). The set up was designed by engineers with input from Infection Prevention teams, so that the limitations were mitigated, and a rig that “worked” was created.   The team involved published a paper on this.   I was asked by a friend (who was / is “extremely clinically vulnerable”) about UVC, for him to treat the shopping he was having delivered that couldn’t be left to stand for 48 hours. I sent him the link to the paper. Then again, he is also a scientist and has an engineering focus too, while he could source / build a UVC rig, and would understand the uses, risks, benefits and limitations of its use, including correct use of PPE while handling the items for decontamination.   I wouldn’t try it for myself : how sure am I that the UV is safe? (Even if it is focused on UVC, am I sure there is no UV-B or UV-A) For “Joe Q. Public” : how sure are you they’d get around the cleaning / shadows? (Or risk being exposed while cleaning?) it might give them a false sense of security ……
    • Thats the kind of mistake and wrong info from using or reading freeman of the land twaddle sites too.   Dx
  • Our picks

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...