intexasatthe moment

ok ,I've cracked . Trinidad could you edit the thread title sothat there is spelt their .Which is no doubt what you intended .

John ,I think you're right there's a line saying "virus free 2 and then the virus checkers web address . I have opened them in Notepad with no content displayed .I think as said upthread that the size of the attachments - 1 and 2 kb indicate that they don't contain anything .

Thank you so much Sephiroth that's so clear ,it's lovely to be able to understand something .Do you teach this stuff ? And huge thanks to Red Devil and Robert Poste's Child as well for bothering to try and help .

ask them to check their source files - um ,sorry to be dense ,but what would they be checking for ? Would it be to see if the 1 and 2 kb files were supposed to have other info/meant to be larger ? This is hard to explain may not be relevant /only of interest if like me you don't have a life but We've been askinf for over a year for certain details ,the sender recently said they'd just sent the attachments and quoted a dated email that they were attached to ,we said please resend as not received ,they sent a oneline email saying "Thank You" ,we asked again and got these ones I'm having trouble with . Anyhoo ...on looking at the dated email referred to ,there was an attachment indication - one of those paperclips - but no attached files at bottom of email .When I clicked on paperclip ,I just got a link to a free virus checker .

I wonder if that's it Red Devil ? It would be so good to know - we are struggling ,without legal help ,to deal with inherited land abroad ( used to be an associated state with Britian and follows UK law ) .

They're 1 and 2 kb Sheporith . I didn't know that Red Devil ( and lots of other stuff ) so it would help to know how many files were sent . There is one ie 1kb "empty" attachment for each PDF attachment . But there is also a single attschment titled image jpg which is also "empty" when opened .

are they just files created by the virus checker ? - I don't know ,surely that wouldn't appear as an attachment ? Are they sending in HTM because it's online content ie so you can view it offline? I don't know ,I don't understand these things .I'm expecting copies of documents ,letters - would that be likely to be online content? Could you explain a bit more ? If someone got something digitally and then wanted to forward it ,would that be online content ?

Would that be different from the number of attachments do you think Saffron ??

Yes ,I'm wondering about paranoia setting in - hoping someone here can advise before I'm off down the raoad....

I don't know if this makes sense but when I say I can't open them ,maybe that's not correct . They open ,but there's nothing there except a line saying virus free www.avast.com .

and is there any hope of opening them ? Received a number of attachments in an email .Can open the PDF ones ,not the ones ending htm . These are long long awaited and requested from a non UK solicitor and should contain important info which for a long time has been witheld .We think there is a time limit to the issue we are discussing and that the slcr is time wasting . So it's hard not to think that the files have been deliberately sent in an unreadable format .I'm clueless about such things and don't even know if that's possible . Any advice ??

What kit did you use Malumbu ? I'd be doing it by hand if that's relevant .

Norwood Roofing have just finished renovating our roof . Our house is quite deep and the roof has a lot going on with flat roofed areas ,hips and valleys . Chimneys and parapet bits have been rerendered ,all the ridges and hip bits sorted with new pointing and tatty old tape replaced with lovely lead flashing .My soffits have been repainted and my old guttering renewed . And probably lots more to the flat bit that I can't think of here . Dave kept me updated throughout with pictures and detailed spec of what was to be done . He obviously has a lot of experience and knows exactly what he's doing . Dave and Patrick were both brilliant ,a real pleasure to meet and considerate and helpful workers .They quoted quickly for the work ,always on time cleaned up after them . Their quote was very competitive and I was pleasantly surprised - I thought it would be more .

Thanks malumbu ,those reviews are helpful . Sue ,I guess it's a shade before old banger status ,though others may feel there are no shades there . I guess I don't want to make it look worse and want to try and ward of rust .

I'm curiously enthralled by this thread . You'll have to keep us updated Sue and inparticular let us know if you go for cardboard box mock up ,template or carpet approach .

I share your curiosity .I guess people are just nervous ? I went to a Leaseholders Roadshow when it was held locally https://www.theleaseholdroadshow.co.uk/ and asked about Right to Manage . They weren't very encouraging about going for right to manage and were pushing buying a share of the freehold .They were quick to point out that the Freeholder would have a share in the management company formed under right to manage .But that seems fair enough ,and they wouldn't have a controling vote . It would be interesting to know how you get on .

Thank you . It is an old banger ,just trying to prolong it's life . Stitch in time and all that .

No magical app I suppose where you can take a photo of the space and a photo of the object ...... There seems to be apps for everything else so who knows !

Inspired by Sue's request ,here's one of my own . I don't expect to achieve anything like a professional finish but just wondered if anyone had attempted dealing with this themselves using T cut or similar and had any advice ? It is of course silver metallic and I would say that some of the scratches are quite deep .

I'm interested in this as well. Anyone any experience ???

Thanks .

So ,reading this from the SLN "Meadow last week released a statement concerning the October 16 ruling, saying: ?Southwark Council?s successful application for security for costs means that on top of the ?150,000 DHFC is now being expected to pay it will also face an eventual legal bill of over ?450,000 if DHFC fights and loses the case at the trial in November.? do we understand that Meadow(in DHFC's name ) won't be appealing against Southwark's decision not to renew the lease ?

Glad the planning appeal has been withdrawn . Wasn't there also an appeal against Southwark not wanting to renew the lease for the Greendale site ? Or am I hopelessly confused ?

LynnB ,thank you for your post above . Interesting points in the leaflet . "It should only be a temporary closure. The damage caused by heavy goods vehicles led to the bridge being closed to motor traffic in October 2016 under a temporary Traffic Management Order (Section 14 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984). This means Southwark Council has a legal duty to repair and reopen the bridge. Southwark Council estimates the cost of repairing the bridge to allow light traffic (i.e. cars) to be just ?17,000. Southwark Council has chosen to ignore the order to repair and reopen the bridge, instead opting for a public consultation on whether to reopen it at all. The same thing happened in 2007, and Southwark Council was obliged to fulfil its responsibilities and re-open the bridge."

I'm not sure why Camberwell Grove being called a main road ( by whom I don't know ,I've not scrutinised the thread to find out ) is of such concern to you James that you feel the need to point out that it has neither an A or B classification . As far as I can tell these classifications are very unhelpful when thinking about routes "B roads are numbered collector routes, which have lower traffic densities than the main trunk roads, or A roads. This classification has nothing to do with the width or quality of the physical road, and B roads can range from dual carriageways to single track roads with passing places." [en.wikipedia.org] I can only imagine that you are trying to downplay the physical characteristics of Camberwell Grove it's lack of bends and it's width . If the A and B classification has implications as far as funding maintenance perhaps you should explain .