Jeremy

My rule of thumb for second hand cars has always been <4yrs old and <50K on the clock, with only one private owner. But there's nothing vageuly scientific behind it, it's just my personal comfort zone. Most 7yr old cars will probably be fine for another 5 years, unless it's been badly treated (i.e. company car driven everywhere in second gear by resentful sales reps). Audis are good cars for sure, but you're paying a large markup for the brand. Seat/Skoda/Honda/Toyota all good cars and better value for money.

El Pibe Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > football, sorry 'soccer' It looked more like kabaddi from the picture.

Out of interest - why not apply for planning, rather than build something which isn't really what you wanted?

Getting a big, wide smile from my baby daughter when I get gome from work. Opening a nice cold beer when I get home from work. Getting home from work.

Looks like the cut-off date is 1st July 1948 http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/permission/commonprojects/extensions/ So the extension only counts as "original" if it was done before that date. So it does seem likely that you'll need planning permission.

What game is that they're playing, EP?

I'm on PAYE but still have to fill in a tax return... and almost always it turns out that HMRC think I owe more than I've paid throughout the year so I have to pay a lump sum. Now THAT really sucks, because it's money that you thought you had in the bank. I guess the point is that no normal person likes paying tax... it doesn't make you feel good about yourself, the same way that it does when you put a tenner in the charity collection box. That's fine, nothing to feel guilty about, almost all of us could do with a few extra quid. But it's a bloody big leap from there to actively squirming your way out of paying your fair share by transferring money out of the country or paying it into a dummy company.

And people who decide to put their bags/shopping/lunch on the seat next to them. Nobody should have to say "excuse me can you please move your crap, you selfish idiot".

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > People on rush hour trains who seem to be unaware > of the fact that they are wearing a rucksack. Agreed... but would expand it to any passengers who don't use the space effectively and prevent others from boarding. Also people who dawdle around the platform aimlessly, getting in peoples way and preventing them from getting onto that train which is about to leave! 99% of tube passengers, then.

I don't eat such revolting things (and that's saying something), but a quick google indicates that the "cheese" element consisted of a sachet of parmesan-like powder you sprinkled on the top.

Wow... that's a bit touchy isn't it?!

Just to echo DaveR... I simply don't understand how anyone could make a comment such as there is no such thing as "tax avoidance within the law". It's defined by the HMRC, which I believe have greater authority on UK tax than "Gray off the EDF". The issue is that you seem to think such practices are fine, since they are within the law. And I'm sure some other people would agree with you... I just don't happen to be one of them!

Gray, you are confusing tax avoidance with tax evasion. Lots of people avoid paying tax within the law (almost every single IT contractor, for a start). It's legal, it's commonplace, but nevertheless it's wrong in most peoples eyes.

Gray Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > By tax avoidance I assume you mean the completely > legal free movement of capital between EU member > countries as one of the four founding principles, yes? Being legal doesn't make something ethical. Besides, we all have our own individual moral compass... if a company is doing something we don't like, the sensible thing to do is to stop using them.

StraferJack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think Liverpool fans should focus their ire in Suarez I basically agree with that. Although I still think that this is not as serious as some other stuff that goes on... nevertheless he brought it on himself.

How about removing all his teeth? I don't think anyone's suggested that yet. He could always get fake ones put back in after his playing career is over.

Isn't it a caravan park? Rather than a proper "camping" place...

Agree that outisde, after midnight, and midweek is not OK even as a one-off.

I have no problem with redheads at all. In fact, theoretically I am not averse to the idea of a flame haired, power-crazed, evil witch. Just not this one. No siree. Now, who will be the first person to be offended by the change in direction of this conversation?

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think she's rather attractive Now that's just not right.

Loz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Yeah, really. Because it represents a much bigger issue. Which is? Although of course everyone has the right to live free from fear of violence, sexual equality is not about pretending men and women are equally vulnerable physically.

Perhaps sometimes it's better just to wish a local business good luck...

Yeah but tyson actually bit a chunk out of holyfields ear. The pain would have been immense, and he was left permanently disfigured.

Oh, OK. Yeah you're right, don't give a shit about him.

*Bob* Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Prezza Who?