miga

Well yeah, that's the crux - how did they? Can they provide the evidence? Do they have to? Do they store the footage? Did a camera operator write down the plate numbers and take two obscure photos? Is the operator's word/note enough? To be honest, it's a route we use, the 20-25% of the car that's visible looks like ours, so ordinarily I'd just pay, but given the rigmarole I've been through with this nonsense and what shoddy customer service I've received, I'm minded to be bloody minded. For context, I've never challenged a fine, and I can't remember the last time prior to this I was fined for a driving offense.

I've received a PCN from TfL - the car vaguely looks like ours in the photo, but I can't see the registration plates (which, along with most of the car, are obscured by the van in front). As this incident was over a year ago (long, boring story, including multiple screw ups by TfL just to get to the stage where the PCN is finally re-issued to the correct address) - I can't remember if one of us was driving then and there. Should I just pay up and forget about it? I feel like I should ask for further evidence that it was our car, but is this likely to lead to some kind of resolution or will they just say the plates were observed without providing further photos?

I did enjoy the pun filled, AM lyrics referencing, comments section on the first one she did a few weeks ago.

civilservant Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > now, now, miga, what was all that about? It's obvious isn't it? I played your game of "anecdote to behavioural diagnosis" for laffs. > > everyone takes risks and many people break rules - > that IS a pretty obvious fact, isn't it? well > done for pointing that out. but i'd have thought > that it's also pretty obvious that risks can be > disproportionately weighted against some groups > e.g. cyclists and pedestrians. Ah, so it's the cyclists themselves you're actually concerned about. That's good of you. Slightly confused way to go about showing your concern by focusing on some careless ones and comparing them to cars with bad brakes, though, because that sounds like you're extrapolating to negative conclusions based on the behaviour of some. Which is what this thread has been largely about - starting off by calling for removal of infrastructure for cyclists based on the alleged behaviour of one person then running through the usual litany of "psycho cyclist" behaviour. I completed the cyclist thread equivalent of Godwin's Law (for laffs) - "but they don't pay road tax". > so wouldn't you agree that a rule-breaking blue > car driver doesn't run quite the same personal > danger of being squashed as a rule-breaking > cyclist? hence my question - it's simply not > logical to put oneself in a situation when the > risk is so great and the reward so small. That's not a question, that's a statement. In your previous post, your question was obviously rhetorical. If you have an actual question, I'd be HTH.

civilservant - every day I watch drivers of blue cars/white vans/red buses take risks and break rules. Is it just because I have a weird hangup about a particular mode of transport that I'm focusing on this/that/other group, or is it the unfortunate statistical reality that out of many, many people, some will do things I find unpleasant? Nah... It's got to be the blue cars! Or was the answer you were looking for to confirm your prejudice something along the lines of: "Nah mate, it's the cyclists, they're risk taking psychos and that's why they flout the rules. I'd make 'em pay road tax, me!".

I'd like to see some figures on how many cyclists actually ride on the pavement or run red lights. Often, discussions on cycling infrastructure etc. get sidetracked by people generalising based on the behaviour of a handful. I cycle ~20 miles a day, and in that distance, sometimes with a lot of road congestion, I see all manner of rules broken, incl. by cyclists. But, in my experience, most cyclists are courteous and law abiding. On the other hand, being alert saves me from being squashed, cut off, running into dozy pedestrians crossing a red light (which I know is legal), coming a cropper on poorly thought through bike infrastructure etc. daily. This, of course, is anecdotal, just as the exaggerated experience of the red light running bike lunatic is. It's funny how alive that stereotype is for a lot of people though, even with the thousands of quite normal, quite law abiding commuters in hi viz forming the vast majority of London's cyclists.

Signed, for what it's worth. Worryingly - in the recent TfL announcement of takeovers of suburban lines, Sevenoaks TL seemed to not be included. When I contacted a local councilor, who had contributed to the Adonis' "Turning South London Orange", he wasn't clear on whether this would be the case. Certainly that study - which partly drove the TfL announcement, makes no mention of the Catford Loop trains. Think we might be stuck with TL for some time - though any improvement would be great.

Alex K wrote: > He, like most of > us, wanted to provide a full service when he went > into our profession. He, unlike most of us, could > afford to do so without collecting a salary. That is a bit of an extreme example, but social mobility as it applies to various professions, has been on my mind through this thread. There are jobs where a long, low-paid "apprenticeship" is required, but the end game, should one succeed, is very, very lucrative. It's not just about money either, some jobs, like pure research, won't ever pay particularly well, but need very bright, highly trained people to do them. Unfortunately, those jobs are no good to young people who need to get paid. No wonder so many of the best technical minds wind up working in the City.

Sarcasm?

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > proposals from TfL that the Sevenoaks trains e > moved to London Overground franchise - then a Really? Hallelujah!!!

Morleys and Franco Manca. Iceland and Waitrose. Costa and Taylor St. Baristas. As Charlie Brooker once said, a meal is just a shit you haven't had yet.

Someone further up the thread mentioned exponential increase of money - probs crossed wires.

Loz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Seabag Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > If I start with a ?1 where do I get to by day > 365 > > > > I'm thinking big here > > That would be (2366 - 1), which is 7.5153 x 10109. > Or a little over a billion googol quid. If you use 2 as a base, and you missed a ^, (2^366 - 1) :-) Have now spent a good 20 minutes reading about power series, partial sum, divergent and convergent infinite series and such. Nice diversion! Of course, Alan Medic was right about the ?1 calculation, it's ~?67k if the problem is as stated by OP, but with pounds instead of pennies. Saving >?50 quid a day from mid-Feb would start proving a bit of a problem.

*removed tasteless joke*

The project essential is a good one, with decent cartridge included. 200 squids at Richer atm. The days of getting a bargain quality second hand turntable (or records for that matter) seem to be in the past - eBay sellers know the value of such things.

I think we can all agree, at this festive time, that with sufficient armed and logistical support, as well as appropriate safety equipment, nowhere in London need be a "no go" area. It's "all go".

I will donate if you let Louisa back into the main section.

Blah Blah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > A bit like pinning your economy on just the city > and property even ;) Well, that's two (non-commodity) sectors already...But "the City", however you choose to define it, often has its importance to the overall economy a bit overstated anyway*. The whole financial sector makes up less than 10% of the overall economy**. As anyone with an expensive education in something very useful like economy or political sciences knows***, it's the buying and selling of capuccinos that keeps all western economies ticking along. *different topic **www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/sn06193.pdf ***not useful

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > England's financial services would be fine without > having the Bits fooked up by the Scottish banking > mafia Sir Fred and the RBS (Royal Bank of > Scotland) HQ Edinboro' and HBOS - guess what the > BOS stands for and the Scottish based BOS was > mainly responsible for the horrendous commercial > property loans that took out HBOS and yet Pravda > SNP still blamed the 'spivs in the City' rather > than the spivs in Edinboro Hang on, hang on...one of the key factors that sunk RBS in 2008 was the disastrous takeover of ABN Amro (2007/2008), a takeover they *won* ahead of Barclays, which both were dead set on. There but for the grace of God etc...Also, and this is the bigger problem with what you said, it's naive to think of any of these big banks as "national" banks servicing some kind of nationalist agenda. Certain "types" cluster in the leadership teams, but this has not much to do with the bank's country of origin. Long bow.

Oh, with that I fully concur. Pinning your economy on one commodity is wacky.

I studied something very geeky at university. I work in a geeky job. I first saw the original ones about 15 years ago, once I'd already started work, because I felt obliged to as it's such a cannonical part of "geek culture" and referenced so much. My take on it is that if you were an adolescent at a particular time (when they came out + ~10 years), and had not been exposed to sci fi, or much film or literature in general when you saw it, you're likely to think it's the best thing since sliced bread. For the rest of us, they're fun flicks, but not the high point of sci fi people make them out to be. I'm fully aware this is practically blasphemy in certain circles.

Yeah - agree that while those predictions seem laughable now, they weren't wildly out of line with what "the experts" thought. Anyway - if at the time someone thought they were laughable they could have made a pretty penny by now based on their "realistic" expectations.

I love how his mind works...."I'll talk to the computer guy about shutting down the interwebs". Superb.

red devil Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It wouldn't let me post V-irginia without the hyphen That makes perfect sense, she wouldn't be a V-irginia without her hyphen.

Agree with all. And for real equality - ban private schools too, entrenching bourgeois values and class privilege and perpetuating unfairly won advantage! Ah, hang on...this looks like the wrong meeting. What's that, the Trots meet next door on a Tuesday? Sorry, as you were...