micromacromonkey

herne hilly Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Can understand why they would install in a cluster > as there was a lot of road digging to get the 5 i > have saw being done in se24. Saying that, > positioning them outside sunray park on a dead end > road with no houses around is odd. > I would be interested to know how many hours they > have been used, from what i have seen i would say > at most one has been used for maybe a few hours in > total in the last month. They are empty 99% of the > time Chicken and egg though. There aren't many electric vehicles using the chargers because overall the charging infrastructure is insufficient to support their practical use. So we need to build the infrastructure to make it easier for people to take the plunge and buy eletric cars. (I think I also sent that message via PM for some reason oops)

It's interesting that people are simultaneously complaining that the council (or whoever... e-car illuminati?) are wasting money by installing them yet saving money by cynically installing them next to each other.

I don't have an electric car but I wholeheartedly support the implementation of these. If it makes it slightly more difficult to park my diesel car then I will just deal with that in the knowledge that it's a penalty for my continuing air pollution. (I do 6000 miles a year on my bike and only about 2000 in the car so not much point in me buying an electric one right now, even with the ULEZ coming in.)

It's the water temperature yes. It was a bit nippy on Sunday, the kids were frozen after 20 mins.

Angelina Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don't know why people do - I usually just ask > through the door who it is and say "I'll get my > husband....he's in the garden with his friends, > hold on", or "I can't open the door, the dog's > going mad" "I'm just polishing my baseball bat collection, be there in a minute" etc

It's impossible to clone chip and PIN cards to another chip and PIN card. What you *can* do is to clone it to a mag stripe card, and then use that. It's an important distinction. In a 'card present transaction' (i.e. face to face in a shop, not online) the credit card company (e.g. VISA) will assume liability for any losses, because they would have been the fault of their system. However if the cloned card is used, and the merchant allowed the person to do a signature or other less secure mechanism then it is the merchant's responsibility, not VISA or the bank or whoever. This means that in the above case it's likely that this clone might have happened, and the merchant where the cloned card was used is most likely liable for allowing the transaction to happen with a less secure method, either because they don't understand or are actively complicit in the fraud. In a 'card not present' (CNP) transaction (i.e. online, or over the phone) then it is also the merchant who is liable for losses, as clearly the chip and PIN security features can't be used here, and so tha tis why a lot of fraud occurs this way. Incidentally if the merchant requires 'verified by VISA' (or whatever the mastercard one is)then they are no longer liable, since this is the online equivalent of entering your PIN, in security terms at least.

Payments to merchants (i.e. the shop) are (almost) never processed immediately. What happens is that the authorisation is done online when you tap or enter your PIN, which means that the merchant's PIN terminal contacts their payment processor (e.g Worldpay), which contacts the card issuing bank and checks that the card is good for that amount. In fact for most contactless transactions it doesn't even do that; they just assume it's OK (and will prompt youto use your PIN every now and again). At the end of that day all the merchant's transactions are batched up and sent off to their payment processor and then settlement occurs (i.e. the money is actually taken out of each buyer's account and put in the merchant's account). At no point during that transaction are any details available to anyone to use, don't worry.

TE44 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I have a card you can only take money out with, > that suits me. If card is lost there will be no > immediate alternative. Not everyone has nor wants > access to computers or has smart phones. Sorry > havent read all this thread but just saying. If you don't *want* access to a computer or smart phone (there are people like this in my department... I work in the IT department FFS!) then that's your choice, you can't go to the cafe. You are disenfranchising *yourself*, which is quite another matter to being disenfranchised because you are ineligible for a card/phone/whatever.

Siduhe Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > DWP certainly prefer to make a payment into a bank > account, an account with a credit union or a > prepaid card which can be reloaded to receive the > majority of benefits now that universal credit has > been rolled out. Pre-paid cards generally aren't > contactless but you can use them like a normal > debit card. > > While most basic bank accounts or credit union > accounts offer debit cards as part of the general > package, the decision whether to issue one is an > individual decision of the bank for any individual > account, and the general rule of thumb is the less > financially stable you are, the less likely you > are to be offered a debit card even on a basic > bank account, just a cashcard, so people end up > using the account to pay bills via direct debit > and taking out cash. It's a real failing (IMHO) > of the drafting of the regulations which require > the largest current account providers in the UK to > offer fee-free basic bank accounts to customers > who are either unbanked or who are ineligible for > a standard current account. > > Those people who can't even get a basic bank > account (often because they are deemed too high > risk because of previous financial difficulties or > fraud) have to use something called the Payment > Exceptions Service which is a voucher based > system. Thanks, useful information. I do take issue with the general idea that you are more likely to spend irresponsibly with a card vs cash (which is surely the implication for not giving one to 'high risk'/rubbish with money type people). Surely if you go and withdraw a load of cash and you are bad at managing it then you are more likely to spend it if you have it sitting there. I also strongly disagree that carrying cash is somehow safer than carrying a card as someone else suggested above. If you don't have contactless then the card is much more difficult to use than cash, and if you do have contactless then as long as you notify the bank you have a good chance of getting back any money spent on it, and if you have the bank's app (or you just call them up) you can put a temporary block on it.

TonyQuinn Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don't think the mulletman will be welcome. Nor > would Mr Dyson, or Mr Woolfson of Next or even Mr > JCB. Milkshakes at the ready. It's astonishing that someone who is clearly a good businessman is such an utter moron. I went to an evening of Brexit discussions with him, Anna Soubry and a few other interesting people and it was clear he doesn't really know what he is talking about.

Siduhe Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If you're someone (like me) who has a bank > account, a regular salary or pension and who > doesn't think much about buying a coffee on the > way to work every day, this undoubtedly seems like > a great, convenient idea. > > However, alongside of the practical issues for the > elderly or people who don't work through illness - > it's the overall signal this sends which I am > uncomfortable with. Going cashless signals to > people who rely on cash, and are almost certainly > economically vulnerable, that "their kind" aren't > welcome to share these spaces. Put yourself in the > position of a parent who doesn't have any spare > cash, and for whom a once a week treat for their > kids at the park cafe is the single luxury they > allow themselves to keep within budget - there are > plenty of people for whom this is a day to day > reality. I count myself incredibly fortunate that > I'm not one of them, but it's totally wrong to > ignore that in the name of convenience. > > This move basically tells anyone who is unbanked > that they are not as welcome to use our public > spaces and council run amenities, when they are > exactly the kind of people who need the support > most. In the US, a few cities have enacted laws > that prevent restaurants from going cashless for > exactly this reason. > https://www.citylab.com/equity/2019/03/cashless-ca > sh-free-ban-bill-new-york-retail-discrimination/58 > 4203 Don't you also need a bank account to receive benefits now? There must be fewer and fewer people who do not have one. I guess a few of those could be without a contactless card. I used to have some sort of rubbish non-switch card switch card once, but I could still use it to buy stuff.

Better for the business: Bank charges for cash handling are getting higher, employees with fingers in the tills, theft from premises overnight, shorter dwell time at the tills etc. Better for most consumers: why would you carry a selection of bits of metal and paper around to exchange for most likely a different set of bits of metal, when you can carry a small piece of plastic, or even better just use your phone, which you are likely to have with you anyhow? If you are worried about tracking spending (as one person said above) then get your bank's app. My credit card app sends me a notification instantly for every purchase. It's not ideal for people without bank accounts, but frankly those sort of people are unlikely to be paying ?9.75 for a fish finger sandwich.

A better course of action is not frequenting Starbucks. Evil megacorp selling substandard coffee.

eat it? https://environetuk.com/blog/Is-Japanese-knotweed-safe-to-eat

Gary Vu - 07872 178044, also has loads of other recommends on here

goldilocks Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It is however based on the kings annual pollution > maps which are made based on monitoring > information, and that have now been updated with > 2016 data and have projections to 2020. So an > alternative could be to look there! > > https://www.londonair.org.uk/london/asp/annualmaps > .asp Would be interested to know how their model works. Clearly they have taken readings at a number of different sites and then just extrapolated based on a few variables; presumably 'distance from a road' is one, perhaps also altitude or prevailing wind direction. Wondering how it works exactly.

rupert james Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > People may not like to hear but cycles *(and cars and trucks and pedestrians)* only pass > through for a very brief period in the morning and > evening rush hours after that the roads are very > quiet. Why the need to change? > > Has anyone got information on the above? Fixed that for you. It's called 'rush hour' for a reason. That is when the majority of all types of vehicle are using the roads. Schemes must be designed to cope with this, not with the daily average.

I'm for it. Zone Q has made it a massive pain to park on my road with all the displacement. Interestingly though, how much does it cost? "the sum of one hundred and five pounds (?125.00) in respect of a permit which, subject to the provisions of this order, shall be valid for a period of twelve months commencing from the beginning of the month in which the permit first became valid;" so is it ?125 or ?105?

150k? What do you get for that exactly? Is that the whole thing? Interested to know. I have absolutely no idea how much commercial premises cost, but I had assumed that it was a lot more than that. Presumably planning rules prevent it from being turned into residential, where it would be worth 10x that.

It was great when they were in the little space next door. I am a total coffee snob and I really enjoyed theirs along with the nice pastries and they were great with kids too. Something about the big space just doesn't work though, and I guess most people have felt that way. Was the flying pig also owned by the same people? (There was a door between the two premises by the loos.) I really loved their beer (even if I some of the more obscure bottles were 9 quid each!) and the pulled pork etc they used to do.

bumr about Aneto, the kids love that place. I agree though it hasn't transitioned very well into that larger space.

Great, I voted for Tessa Jowell. I also placed the 'wellness' one last as I find the concept of 'wellness' and its associated pseudoscience peddlers most irritating.

Goldie has fallen on hard times.

Despite my casually discriminatory attitude towards cabbies, I must say that the majority I actually talk to seem to be OK. I have a couple of times in the last year had to flag one down as I had a puncture and was late for a meeting, and had to shove the bike in the back. Always seemed pretty reasonable. I wonder how many cabbies actually agree with the LTDA's policy on bike lanes and whatever else they like to pontificate on? A lot of people don't necessarily think that their union has their best interests at heart (e.g. Len McCluskey and associated arseholes).

Next time tell him Nigel Farage lives south of the river, he'll be your best mate and take you wherever you need.