KidKruger

A dead animal inside a drain would probably bloat a bit so you may have got an exagerrated impression of how big the rat really was. A big cat is for example, a Maine coon, rats that big would have been spotted and caused a scare in the area !! I've seen dead cows in rivers that I thought were rhinos or even elephants but it was just the gas from bloating.

Katie1997:

String vests on anyone.

Dungarees.

= double faux pas from KK then.

Get housemate to ID the dog owner and report him.

It may not be first time there may be others who've suffered loss of their pet.

Ridgley - No expense will deliver equal (or almost equal) parenting if there's a spiteful Mother. The courts do not enforce shared parenting. It relies almost solely on the Mother's inclination. It really is a travesty.

This is a big issue in UK legal system, we're behind France and (say) Sweden so I hear.

Jessie, you're correct of course it CAN happen and DOES happen, but where the parents are WILLING.

The courts will not try to enforce shared parenting when there is dispute, they will take the cheap route and exile the child to a 'main' parent (the Mother).

Cat calls the Dog "hairy arse".

Gulp !

Pugwash - if you and fella ever split (which of course you won't), chances are it would be non-amicable and once the tensions of asset splitting etc etc take their toll, the (worthy) aspiration may not be achievable. If there's a lot of anger the offspring are liable to find themselves weapons, withdrawn then reinstated by the custodial parent.

Eventually it could end in proceedings to finalise some kind of pattern. The ideal is surely as much time with both parents as is POSSIBLE. Unfortunately the courts don't follow that line. The custodial parent will argue it's a distraction to the child's life having non-custodial parent interrupt it by turning up to spend time with the child (the previous years' of successful joint-parenting being conveniently forgotten).

Very possibly, one of you would be designated as 'chief' parent by the courts, the other would be assigned a schedule of 'contact' (isn't that what we do with aliens) to settle the disputes over who spends time with the child(ren) and when. The child is the loser in these situations, because the courts are spineless.

Ha ! I actually forgot, got waylaid in the pub and met a neighbour, rest is history. I happened to wake up around 4.00am though and found a free stream on t'internet and caught the last 5 rounds. Alvarez looked as good against Rhodes as he does against other recent opponents, which I thought he wouldn't be able to do, because of how good Rhodes is. When the fight was stopped in R12 I thought it was a bit soon as Rhodes seemed OK and able to compete, but I hadn't seen the first 6 rounds of punishment that Rhodes had taken (also apparently Rhodes' corner threw the towel in around then too anyway).

Having thought about Alvarez I'd like to see him v Sergio Martinez if he proceeds to Middleweight.

The reason the courts enforce pro-Mother is because it's less grief for them, not some holy belief that "It's that bond that gives the mother more right under the law over the father".

Society is taught that children deserve 2x loving parents (resumably equally loving and equal bonds), but when the parents split "It's THAT bond that gives the mother more right....".

As per much other court behaviour, illogical and one-sided.

And sexist. Or is sexism OK here because it's detectable elsewehere society and therefore 'evens the score' !?

Ridgley is exactly correct in his last comment.

The courts impose IMO a sexist regime, particularly outside London region, with respect to Father's access to their children - where the Mother contends access. 'Mother knows best' seems to be the standard line, especially when she's p!ssed off and bitter and wants to destroy the bond of Dad/kids. Meanwhile the children get distanced from Dad and don't know why. Rarely in kids' interests to delete Dad.

Fathers can fight all their lives for the children's right to have access to Dad, often in vain.

The courts support this set-up I think because it's the route of less grief for them, easier to just go along with Mother.

One of the biggest travesties in UK legal system.

Cameron is an ass. To imply that 'absent Fathers' are predominantly choosing the absenteeism is ignorant, most have the absent mode imposed on them by what is now his Govt's courts !

I dug footings for an extension on Crystal Palace Road and 18 inches-2ft down it was clay, I dug a foot of clay out along the whole 'U' shaped trench. Do NOT tell me that I didn't need to dig down 3ft for a single story extension !

Carrying it out to skip in buckets was murder, clay is a swine to dig and extremely heavy.

So we defo have clay in (at least parts of) East Dulwich.

One for this evening is Ryan Rhodes v Canelo Alvarez in Mexico.

Rhodes is 34, Alvarez is 20, the youngster is strong and vital, though Rhodes is no old timer, being fast-footed and an unorthodox boxer, pundits are saying Alvarez by KO.

However I fancy Ryan by stoppage mid-late rounds, I admit it's an emotional prediction though !!

The sofa I got there for ?85 I still sit on, though recovered now.

I have a 1930s kitchen cabinet from there with all sorts of cupboards and drawers, shelves and storage bins.

Used to spend time wandering around in there when friends visited, they were always amazed. The building itself had a lovely exterior, I'm sure somewhere there'll be a photo of the facade, from memory it was turn of the century architecture. Gutted when I saw it'd been bulldozed, didn't even try to preserve the exterior walls !

So, are any of you currently slutting-it up on the slutwalk ?

I think it's happening around now isn't it ?

Oh cool, the forum technology converted my word to symbols when I said I'd 'twat' him.

See, look, 'twat', 'twat'..

How cool.

Lloyd Grossman is he the 'through the keyhole' ponce ?

If I see him I'll twat him for ya (as I say 'iron that you ponce').

Most of us have had slutty times, boys and girls. And if not, why not, dammit.

RosieH, well that's the conundrum isn't it, and slightly anti-girl.

Anyway I want to exercise my right to dress like a slut, once I find out what that would entail...

How would a male dress as a (male) slut ?

Open-necked shirt, medallion, soft sneakers and 70's shades, oh no hold on, that's a pimp..

He had power and KO'd many folks, I mean his KO of Sprott in the last few seconds with his left hook whilst his right arm was (I thnk) disclocated was impressive. That's how Harrison should have fought all the time, not just driven by last-chance saloon. He's certainly done now as far as world-level aspirations go, even given the lack of quality in the division today. Perhaps European again. Hey, it'd be really interesting if he came back in like 5 years (ala Holyfield) and cleaned-up !!

Contest I want to see is Nathan Cleverly v Beibut Shuminov, hopefully it'll happen before Xmas as a unification at Light Heavyweight.

Chisora beating Harrison would do Chisora no favours, it certainly would demonstrate he's ready for big fights IMO because Harrison isn't a gateway to anywhere relevant to an ambitious boxer.

He was a great amateur (well, he got Gold at the Olympics), made some cash, I think he ran some sort of motivational training courses and probably has some property and other stuff. He's not really part of the boxing scene going forward though, there's so much more intersting stuff happening.

Back to half-decent fighters.

Kevin Mitchell is fighting John Murray I think around September. I think Mitchell's only loss is to Katsidis and John Murray is tough as oak. It'll be a good 'fight' but Mitchell will take a few too many punches for my taste (he seesm to think that's one of the tools to use, like Froch) and Murray just keeps coming forward. My bet is John Murray gets it.

The guy they're lining Harrison up with will walk through him and retire him for good anyway, regardless of what Harrison says !!

Rather than thinking about what compensation you can engineer from this scenario you should be thinking about the costs you will INCUR.

From my experience of owning flats, ALL leaseholders split the costs for external wall coatings, roof repairs and common drainage, shared TV aerials etc.

If I was top floor and needed roof repairs for a leak I'd be looking to split the costs with the other flats, at least those below me. I've done this before and nobody argued, especially about scaffolding. There's water above your property entering the building and gravity will take care of the rest.

If the roof isn't fixed won't the weather eventually get to YOUR flat and ruin YOUR property. Sounds highly convenient to have this sorted asap, actually !!

Leasholding is a collective (in this case) activity so I'd say you should engage asap !

I'm really quoting the article on ESB which says it's a sham. I'd watch it, and it's certainly not a sham inthe sense of Haye/Harrison. BTW I think Harrison is making a comeback in the late autumn.

I don't think Mayweather will ever actually fight Manny, he asked for $100 Million for that contest - 10% of a BILLION dollars !! This sum was IMO proposed because he knows it's unrealistic. I'd love to see what he does if that offer did come through, I feel there would be another reason the fight couldn't happen.

The Ortiz fight will earn money and get Mayweather another World Title for his collection, he wouldn't want anything less than a world title contest, given his pedigree and the legacy he clearly still wants to protect. I think he's infatuated with preserving his 'O'.

The Ortiz fight may well be a warm-up fight, but not for a fight with Manny Pac !!