Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks DX - I wondered about the blacked out bits. That's their doing not mine obviously.   Attached is the exhibits part of the bundle. Sorry about this, no matter what I compressed the whole thing down to I got the oversize message, even if the filesize on my computer was showing as well under 4.8mb   The_exhibits-compressed.pdf
    • Thanks Bankfodder!   Hello again everyone.    I received my SAR back from Elderbridge and what and absolute load of **** it is!   1.  They did not send any transcripts or recordings of any phones calls  - both myself and my husband spoke to them in Aug 2016 (noted in their diary notes) and I called them in Dec 2018 (again noted in their diary notes) it was the same day they sent the reply even though they have mentioned me calling in their notes on that day, so not sure I should let that go or not!   I also spoke to them in July 2016 (again in the notes) and I spoke to them in Dec 2012 (again in the notes)    2.  Going through the diary notes in the beginning notes were sporadic mainly because we were making payment and everything was ok, then later as things changed there were notes almost once a month, then in NOV 2012 and Dec 2012 frequency of notes increase as this is when they began court proceedings.  and throughout 2013 again lots of notes made - mostly their in house stuff about court dealings and so on - so that's fine. then in NOV 2013 hey made a not re the court date in OCT - saying that they were ordered to treat the loan as having a fixed rate from inception and sent off etc.  BUT from 21 Nov 2013 to 17th June 2014 there are no notes at all!  Now the hearing was on the 10th Jan 2014!   17/06/2014 14:43 *****Substantial EVS costs to be added to any SF ****** 17/06/2014 14:43 EVS Defended + At the hearing on 10/01/2014 an SPO for 500 on 26/01/2014 and then CMI + £60 wef 26/02/2014 plus MJ for £103,331.03 suspended on the same terms. It was also held that we could add our costs - Defended costs on this case are £33,879.80. 17/06/2014 00:00 Reviewed Reviewed 17/06/2014 00:00 ***Defended Costs*****:To be added to any SF ***Defended Costs*****:To be added to any SF 21/11/2013 04:13 ADHOC Statement Printed From 03/10/13 To 13/11/13 Batch 2015 Sequence 28 Printed 13/11/2013 00:00:00   Above you can cleary see the gap then suddenly the first notes talk about the court case and costs etc, at the trial in OCT the judge reserved cost till the next hearing (also stated on the documentation from the court)  but then at that hearing in Jan 2014 we did not discuss costs - the 6 month gap I feel is very suspicious.    The final court document  dated 13th Jan 2014 says to pay the claimant £103,331.03 which is the amount outstanding under the mortgage and goes on to says order were not to be enforced as long as we pay etc.  no mention of costs at all - so they seem to just be adding them   3.   They sent a field agent to me in Jan 2018, I only knew this as on the 9th Jan 2018 I was working at home and heard the letterbox, thought it was the postman, went to the door to find an envelope shoved through the door with a letter in it saying they had been requested to visit me and that they called today but I was not in! and gave a number for me to call ( I saw the woman walking down the driveway - but she did not ring the bell! and I wasn't about to run after her!)   But in the notes they have written this utter lie!   30/01/2018 12:44 Field Agent Report Received The field agent visited the security address on three occasions. The customer was spoken to through the window. They refused to discuss and refused to answer the door. The contact number on file is not recognised. RFA - Not known Reasons for items not verified:N/A Details of variances of items outside of expenditure guidelines and reasons N/A Property is a detached house in good condation valued at £406,000. Equity not known. I actually cannot believe what I have read here! Can I ask them for some kind of proof of this, because I don't know who they are talking about but it certainly wasn't me!   4.  the documents they had sent me a joke, they have sent 77 documents in total, none of these are copies of letter from Elderbridge (which is who I sent the SAR to) all from First Plus and certainly not ALL of them, they have been bulked out by sending me copies of documents that I sent TO THEM for my court defence and there are strange Black boxes over some of the text!? which I don't understand!     After receiving this info from Elderbridge I decided to send a SAR to Barclays and I got a small package with a couple of letters, some diary notes and screen shot of the account, as well as a short statement of account. This was for our ORIGINAL loan from Feb 2006,  (we topped it up in June 2006) and the first one was closed.  The second one is the one that has been transferred to Elderbridge but Barclays seem to know be denying ALL knowledge of it! and I know that they still hold the beneficial interest of these loans and that Elderbridge regularly contact Barclays for help and advise - I have contact with other account holders who have diary notes from Elderbridge showing contact to Barclays!..   This week I also had a reply from the FOS (only from an adjudicator not an ombudsman) and his initial opion is that it's ok for Elderbridge to claim the costs as we defaulted, he seems to be ignoring my argument that the relationship is unfair etc but I will be sending this back and asking for it to be looked at by an ombudsman.   But was hoping that someone here could give me any advise re all of this - sorry I know it's a lot!!
    • why all the blanked out stuff in the parking contract? and no proof its paid this year either?  
    • pop the exhibits as a sep file i'll merge them for you
    • Thanks.   I've managed to reduce the file size and deleted from this copy all of the pages of photos and copies of the signs. Just their witness statement and the photos of the car parked up remain.   They say "My company relies on Parking Eye v Beavis (2015) in which it was accepted as an established principle that a valid contract can be made by an offer in the form of the terms and conditions set out on the sign and accepted by the driver's actions as prescribed therein"   Is there a refutation to this case anywhere? Or do I not argue that  and just refer back to EB's earlier post and focus on the signs?   "What you are writing is roughly your side of events and referring to the evidence you can provide so that will include their signage, any evidence or lack of authority for them to offer anything, their paperwork if that doesn't create a liability, the POFA where the vital phrases have been missed by the parking co or the timescales missed.   then you pick holes in the wording and substance fo their claim, for example, contractual sum or breach of contract - they are different. are they claiming from you as driver or keeper, cant assume they are one and the same.   What about the amount claimed? it will invariably include unicorn food tax so if they are saying keeper ia liable they are limited to asking for the amount shown on the NTK and you should make this clear as it helps damage their assertion that driver and keeper liability are the same thing   As they havent responded to your CPR request for documents you can start off with that but it isnt a golden bullet, "   thanks Bundle_the_approved,_signed_statement_with_the_exhibits-_Reduced.pdf
  • Our picks

godnoway

The Nuclear Position

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 247 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

All I have to say is that should all watch this, then the debate can begin:-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why have you posted this twice?


Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had hoped this was going to be a sensible discussion about the use of nuclear power.

That hope seems forlorn with that video as the starting point.

 

Its like starting a discussion on the future of the royal family with a david icke rant claiming they are shape shifting alien lizards!

 

and thats relevant because david ickes ramblings and this video are promoted on the same sort of sites

 

In the words of a famous nuclear physicist - 'You cannot be serious'


I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I had hoped this was going to be a sensible discussion about the use of nuclear power.

That hope seems forlorn with that video as the starting point.

 

Its like starting a discussion on the future of the royal family with a david icke rant claiming they are shape shifting alien lizards!

 

and thats relevant because david ickes ramblings and this video are promoted on the same sort of sites

 

In the words of a famous nuclear physicist - 'You cannot be serious'

 

 

My whole point is to find out if it should be taken seriously or not. It's easy to dismiss him as a lunatic, but some of what he is saying is so specific that it seems to be a case of at least lets hear him out and then see if there is any truth in what he is saying. I am pretty sure if you listen to David Icke, then you will see that he suckers people in with halve truths, mixed with fiction, fantasy and a good tale. This is a little different to Icke simply because Icke can be seen as trying to make a buck.

 

This guy does seem sane and does not seem to be involved in what he is doing for the money. I am only after the truth, if this guy is an idiot or a liar etc then great at least I will have seen enough possible debate to consider what he is saying as absolute nonsense, but to totally dismiss him, without any debate is to my mind, no different to saying hey Edison's DC is best and Tesla's AC is bad because the authority of the day tells us its that way, because ultimately Edison was defending his business, reputation and income based on bias rather than fact.

 

Think of it like science, I am only after the truth, if he turns out be a nutter then great, if he turns out to be telling the truth, then he is one of the biggest whistle blowers of all time, either way, I wanna know.

 

Also as CAG is all about us vs the MAN and how the MAN is always screwing us, I thought this was a good place to at least open it up for debate.

Edited by godnoway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

In the words of a famous nuclear physicist - 'You cannot be serious'

 

And i thought that was John McEnroe, The Tennis player

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My whole point is to find out if it should be taken seriously or not. It's easy to dismiss him as a lunatic,

 

I'm no nuclear physicist (just like most tennis players) but I think

Hiroshima

Nagasaki

and the issues with depleted uranium shells used in Iraq answer any doubts quite adequately for me.

and if they didn't, then Chernobyl certainly would.

 

Now I am completely in favour of nuclear energy as the only real option available for our growing energy needs, even if I have no faith in the commercial and political rather than best scientific decision processes in how, let alone whether nuclear energy is or is not used.

 

Sadly, I also don't think spreading nuclear waste on our toast in the morning would resolve the disposal issue effectively despite the claims in the video.


I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am no nuclear physicist either but I do think what he is saying holds some validity:-

 

 

He actually describes the above dramatized version of the event in his talk, what get's me is that they are all in the room without much in the way of protection, which is how I have heard and seen this event re-told many many times over. If it's that lethal then wouldn't going near the thing without wearing full hazard suits etc be considered at least prudent.

 

It's called tickling the dragons tail as shown above and described here :-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demon_core

Keep in mind the above shown material is weapons grade, which is considered way beyond low or high level waist.

 

I am a scientist at heart - so truth and understanding is my goal, not outlandish conjecture or wild conspiracy, but if he is right, then God almighty this raises so many questions.

Edited by godnoway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am no nuclear physicist either but I do think what he is saying holds some validity:-

 

 

It's called tickling the dragons tail as shown above and described here :-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demon_core

Keep in mind the above shown material is weapons grade, which is considered way beyond low or high level waist.

 

I am a scientist at heart - so truth and understanding is my goal, not outlandish conjecture or wild conspiracy, but if he is right, then God almighty this raises so many questions.

 

and from the wiki link you give :

"The demon core was a 6.2-kilogram (14 lb), 3.5-inch-diameter (89 mm) subcritical mass of plutonium which went briefly super-critical in two separate accidents at the Los Alamos laboratory in 1945 and 1946. Each incident resulted in the acute radiation poisoning and subsequent death of a scientist. After these incidents the spherical plutonium pit was referred to as the "demon core."

 

They died.

 

there is also the consideration that if this guy is right, then it would lead to pretty much all of high energy physics and most of chemistry being wrong.

They work far to well for that to be likely.

 

Although we clearly don't know all there is to know, and there are some real discrepancies in our understanding (the great walls and the structure of Galaxies for starters) I don't think we could possibly be as far wrong currently as would be needed for this guy to be right.


I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point

" If it's that lethal then wouldn't going near the thing without wearing full hazard suits etc be considered at least prudent."

Why are they all standing around weapons grade stuff dressed as if its an average day at the office!

What the guy is saying in the first video basically means that nobody should be anywhere near this thing and according to the regulatory authorities, all of them in the room would be contaminated including the room itself just by taking it out the box!

Much lower grade waste material just being in the room with them would according to the authorities, be considered a hazard zone that would need a fortune spent on cleaning it up - A FORTUNE.

 

My logic is only based on observation, if you have hard empirical data then let me know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My logic is only based on observation, if you have hard empirical data then let me know.

 

Observation of what though?

That is what you need to ask yourself.

 

Don't forget that there were nuclear artillery where the nuclear shells were shielded enough for them to be carted around in wombat sized vehicles.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W48

 

Like cooling pools - which? Power stations and reactors have a number.

Bubbling steaming pits full of super-hot cooling rods really belong in James Bond movies (and are very enjoyable there)

 

LOL Wombat vehicles, not the marsupial,


I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point of his video that he seems to want to make clear is that WE are all paying a fortune for something that WE may not need to be paying a fortune for - the regulations have hiked the price of the nuclear option, for so many dubious reasons, seems to be his message. So should we all be asking deeper questions or maybe we should all just accept everything we are told without question!

 

I am curious enough to ask :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am curious enough to ask :)

 

I understand, I did the same on many occasions (as you might realise) and almost exclusively came out disappointing once examined. But it was something I had to prove to myself.

 

If you really want real mysteries which cast questions on current scientific mainstream beliefs, then look up

The great Wall

http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf067/sf067a08.htm

M.J. Geller, codiscoverer of the Great Wall with J.P. Huchra, remarked:

 

"My view is that there is something fundamentally wrong in our approach to understanding such large-scale structure -- some key piece of the puzzle that we're missing."

or the issue that our understanding of Gravity despite enabling us to get to pluto cannot explain why Galaxies spin as they do without flying apart.

 

Good Hunting


I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like someone who has been told to look over there and forget this, nothing to see here.

Stay on target or at least on thread topic, dark flow and dark energy debates please leave at the door.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I feel like someone who has been told to look over there and forget this, nothing to see here.

Stay on target or at least on thread topic, dark flow and dark energy debates please leave at the door.

 

Ok then perhaps investigate the issue with subcritical masses going super-critical as can happen, hence the safety precautions and immense cost with something that might otherwise be considered only a relatively mild health hazard (in significant but far lesser shielding).

(Let alone ensuring that nobody could just nick some in passing)


I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do take your points on-board, but I think his underlying message is this, we could be doing it all a hell of a lot cheaper and potentially even safer than we are currently doing it, but the industry is using scare tactics to hike the price way higher than it has to be, profit is the goal of almost every business as most CAG viewers will attest to.

 

The scientist who was killed in the above video, did the math after the flash to see who in the room would be OK or not as the case maybe, suggesting that even back then we knew the risks and the math etc. So if these experts are willing to be in a room with weapons grade stuff and they knew the risks involved, then it seems at least to me that some of Galen's points are valid.

 

It is my believe that the nuclear industry has been ripping of the consumer for decades and also the way we currently produce power in big processing plants like he describes may also be the wrong approach, see:-

 

Galen even said in the video we haven't built a nuclear reactor right yet and smaller local reactors etc are the way to go - watch the above link for more on this train of thought. It seems he may have been a man ahead of his time in some respects. I think he was also a man with a message and he should've been listened to a whole lot more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do take your points on-board, but I think his underlying message is this, we could be doing it all a hell of a lot cheaper and potentially even safer than we are currently doing it,

 

I think Chernobyl should convince otherwise even if nothing else does.

 

I see and can find absolutely NO facts whatsoever supporting the position presented in that video. There is lots of innuendo and obtuse illogic.

 

That there are now better ways to build reactors than there were 20 years ago, and that politics and economics have always defined how, when and whether nuclear reactors are built is pretty much unquestionable, yet even that isn't presented in any way realistically.

 

It's conspiracy nut stuff which actually clouds not clears the realities of the situation. That is my honest opinion which to me it is supported by all real-world facts, knowledge and events.

 

Let me end with a question:

Given 3 mile island and Chernobyl, would you want a garden shed nuclear reactor, hacked together from a nuclear artillery shell and the remains of a still at the bottom of your garden, or even in the same county as you and your family?

... Even if it could give out enough energy to do more than boil a kettle as a reactor, despite the shell being able to destroy a reasonably sized Town?


I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think every thread should be taken seriously, because one day someone will start this war and the world we know will end. There are many people who scaring other countries with nuclear weapons. Even is it **** next time can be a real thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does every debate on nuclear "issues" always bring weapons and power generation into the same room? They're two entirely different things!!!!!!

 

My option on power generation?

Chernobyl is the worst nuclear disaster in human history, but the remaining 3 reactors were kept running for decades after the incident and the whole place is now a tourist destination. Guess what my opinion is.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are you so nervous about nuclear energy? As i remember France get about 70-80% of electricity from nuclear power plants. I rather believe in nuclear war nowdays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...