Loz

jimbo1964 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > A hedge in the front. I'll probably buy a little > Bosch one. They're not all that expensive. You won't get very far into an overgrown bush with a little Bosch...

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > UKIP are fairly childish too. No need to join them down there, if that is the case. It just makes you look childish and them look normal.

Counter their argument - it shouldn't be hard. That's what happens in a democracy. Defacing a poster is just childish.

It should be all over in a couple of shakes, then.

tommy_guy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > A trimmed bush would get more attention. Friends will follow and chores become jobs halved through > sharing. > > If it's that much strain PM me your address and I'll come by at the weekend and sort out your > bush. I'll accept a beer as payment. Do you need access to a rear entry or will you just dive in from the front?

Any domain ending in 'gov.uk' must be a government organisation - these domains are not commercially available and therefore can be trusted. Anything ending in 'co.uk' or '.com' or similar will probably be a fake.

We are just entering the busiest time of the year for house-buying, so I'd be surprised if the fizz doesn't stick around for a while.

There's a lot of this about - car tax, EHIC cards, passports, licences, etc, etc, etc. If the website doesn't end in "gov.uk" then be very, very suspicious.

There's a lot of this about - car tax, EHIC cards, passports, licences, etc, etc, etc. If the website doesn't end in "gov.uk" then be very, very suspicious.

In my experience, there are two types of 'full survey'... 1) The completely useless ones done by the survey companies appointed by mortgage providers, especially for the ones that do the provider's valuation. 2) The rather good ones done by independent surveyors. The last house I bought I initially had the first one done. It was so bad I request and got my money back. It was 90% of cut-n-paste general stuff and the other 10% was unbelievably incompetent, they even got the number of rooms in the house wrong. So, I found an independent. I received a 30-odd page report that was written entirely for my property. Yes, it was couched in careful language, but it picked up quite a few points that were very useful to understand certain issues I had noted myself.

Oh dear. This is not going to end well...

Paging Finbarr Saunders...

It happens and is REALLY hard to spot. ALWAYS cover you hand with complete and utter paranoia whenever you enter your pin. I generally use my wallet or the Metro/ES if I have them to hand. And that includes shops. There are CCTV cameras pointed at you...

nashoi Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > A very slight over enunciation of the second > syllable of the word perfect. I bet this drives you nuts then...

They are the lowest form of business, but one of the payday loan companies using the old Heart song "How Can I Get You Alone" in their ad made me laugh just for the pure punnery.

dennis Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If they are in a public space you can photograph > them without consent You can photograph them, but purposely photographing their genitals is an entirely different offence to simple photographic consent. See all the cases of 'upskirt' offences.

Big UKIP vote that will not be replicated at the next general election. Greens to do well and get about 10%. Also not replicated at the next general election The three big parties to not do so well. Not much will change as a result of these elections.

JohnL Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It's worse if you have a stoma or such. I had to google that. And I'm rather sorry I did now. Ew.

So was mine, and at least I had exactly the same situation, but changed it to a child for added effect. You invented an entirely new scenario. You cannot go around photographing people's genitals without their consent, whatever the situation. As you say, you either accept the law or you don't, you can't pick and choose what is legal and what isn't.

Well, to be fair, you started with the crap analogies. He wasn't breaking into anyone's house either.

PokerTime Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > And just on the photo thing. If someone breaks into a home, they are breaking the law. If you > take a photo or take action to help catch them doing it and they retailiate, are you then at > fault for trying to get evidence to convict them? If a child was urinating at the same place as this man, and you take a photo of them (including their genitals), how many years will your name be on the sex offenders register?

Townleygreen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It isnt unofficial either! Those 4 places are all entitled to use Middlesex, dating from the day > they were incorporated in the (then) new county of Greater London. It's a historical county and all > over the country people - if they so wish - can include the old county's name in their addresses. Do you have a source for this?

Townleygreen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I wasn't suggesting that is was needed to get some post delivered, but nevertheless those places are > not in London postal areas but are officially classified as Middlesex, like Beckenham is > officially Kent. It's not official, as there is no official place called Middlesex any more (unlike Kent, which has a county council). And some part of the old Middlesex, like Ealing, do have West London postal codes (e.g. W13, W9, W4) and much of the rest NW postal codes. The rest of it has Uxbridge (UB], Harrow (HA), Watford (WD) and Enfield (EN) codes.

PokerTime Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There is no over analysis of this necessary. A guy takes a pee in a public place (public order > offence). He is seen doing so and challenged (perfectly reasonable) and then laughs in the face > of the challenger by waving his willy. I'll bet he wouldn't have done that at a sizeable bloke. In no > way can any part of his behaviour be classed as reasonable or acceptable. That's all there is to > it. That the OP took a pic and reported him is neither here nor there. I disagree - the OP taking a photo of someone else's genitals is a crucial part of the proceedings. How can it not be?

I now live in Middlesex (Ealing area) and I can confirm that, apart from the odd institution like Middlesex Uni and the cricket club, it pretty much does not exist any more.