Penguin68

This is, of course, completely mad - if the building has already been underpinned then the insurance risk has been addressed - and the 'contents' risk is anyway very limited - possibly to damage to carpets, curtains etc. should there be water incursion (but why would there be?). Underpinning does not increase either fire or loss through theft risk (during the actual works, when the house might have been vulnerable and not secure, is another matter). Insurance companies are scum - and stupid scum to boot. I suggest that you either try to purchase cover via an agent, who might be able to talk more sensibly to insurers, or try the NFU - they seem to have a good reputation and don't just cover farmers.

As Dunstan's road is on a hill it is possible that the heights measured from one side might be OK, but too high if measured from the other (the humps appear to be vertical to a notional horizontal line running through them, rather than 'leaning' as they might if they followed the slope). So it might be an idea to ask them to meaure the humps from both sides to check they meet standards.

The point is that the council has now twice spent considerable funds restricting the exits from Underhill, with no evidence that the accidents have been caused by precipitate and careless exit from Underhill - i.e. the money they have already spent has all been about making the situation worse - clearly they aren't going either to admit their mistake or rectify it. But they have done nothing to remedy the actual problem. Of course it isn't the worst junction in the borough, nor are its traffic levels like the major thoroughfares (i.e. Lordship Lane) which naturally have a higher absolute accident rate. But the junction has always been a problem, and that problem has got no better.

DJKQ wrote:- Being a poor driver is not an excuse for not being able to negotiate tricky junctions I'm afraid. Once again demonstrating the evident fact that the 'blame' for problems at the junction is always placed on those crossing from Underhill - poor (i.e. excessive speed) driving on Barry is always relagated to 'not really a problem'. But it is. As is making the entry and exit from/ to Underhill even more problematic by road narrowing and raised tables. Of course we all have to be careful driving, but that doesn't mean that the junction (a) isn't also a problem and (b) that that problem is entirely the responsibility of drivers moving into or out of Underhill to address exclusively. You can't, on your own, address a narrowed entry which forces you to hover in Barry if someone commits, after you have, to occupying or blocking the way into Underhill. That's particularly true for those turning off Barry into Underhill who may not be able to have full vision into the road until they turn, and then block one carriageway of Barry until Underhill clears. This matters because (as it's status of bus route suggests) Underhill is a significant crossing point of Barry, rather than just being 'any old' residential road.

This argument seems to run and run. I have been driving across the junction for over 20 years now - I have never come across a situation when someone travelling along Underhill has shot-out carelessly into Barry - so all the focus on slowing down/ making more awkward the Underhill bits of the junction is fruitless. There are just two causes of problems here - the visibility at the junction is poor, which forces drivers travelling towards Lordship Lane in particular to have to pull out slightly into Barry to check if the route is clear; and drivers coming along Barry from the Plough end in particular - where there is a clear run - pick-up speed, certainly to the allowed 30mph and often (it seems) somewhat above that. Because entry into Underhill, from both sides, has been artifically restricted (because everyone in traffic wants to blame Underhill drivers) and because there are often buses waiting to cross, this means that drivers crossing often get caught on Barry because they can't access Underhill, and an 'unexpected' car is now racing towards them from the Plough end. Almost everything done to 'ease' the problem has in fact exacerbated it - the humps and the narrowing simply mean that cars attempting to cross Barry (or enter Underhill from Barry) are even more held up than if the way was clear. Remedies are, put simply, to (a) improve visibility and (b) reduce Barry speeds. Remedies are not to increasingly seal-off Underhill making exiting and entering it from either side even more problematic. And the building works on the corner are't exactly helping either, although hopefully they will onlly be temporary - but (I haven't seen the plans) once the buildings are occupied the parking/ cars entering and exiting Underhill at the junction will just make life worse.

'Grey' squirrels can have a russet tinge, either on their backs or the edges of their belly fur - the true red squirrel looks very different (and much browner/ redder, especially about the ears (larger and more tufted). The only southern population of red squirrels is on the Isle of Wight I believe. There is now a new population of black squirrels emerging as well I also believe.

One thing that occurs to me is that if ED seems to be an 'untattood' area then surely it's ripe for your art ?! If people in ED don't have tattoos I don't think it's necessarily because of a lack of a tattoo parlour, but maybe because they have chosen not to. 'Build a stadium and they will come' was always a mythic film, not good marketing advice. If you haven't done this (apologies if you have) some simple market research - stop likely punters around ED and ask - would be a good idea. You don't have to 'open a studio' to see if there is demand - market research is all about stopping people making costly decisions without the relevant information to hand. There is some suggestion that the fashion for this type of adornment is beginning to wane - particularly where people are seeing the look of old tattoos on bodies once much slimmer and younger - make sure you are not surfing a dying wave.

I know you're only kidding, but... in Islingon there's a tattooist just down the road from Waitrose. But which came first?...

I think if we have a tattoo parlour we can absolutely guarantee it won't be followed shortly, or ever at all, by a Waitrose (Sound of huge spoon in pot stirring).

There have been lots of threads on this in the past - these sellers are often run by gang-masters who set up a van somewhere and send them out to hit a neighbourhood. They are not part of some social rehabilitation project - although they are probably otherwise unemployed. The quality is poor because it is a con, and the sellers get to see very little of what they 'earn'.

I would wait until he is charged before your forecast gaol time for him - but of course, as soon as he is charged any such (published) forecast would be a contempt of court, before (and if) his guilt was establised under law.

Until you've experienced it, not sure you can appreciate how frustrating it can be for almost everyone I speak with locally. As I have lived in Chelsea (resident's parking), Prince of Wales Drive, Battersea (b all parking); near Clapham North tube station (ditto) - all of which have involved finding space somewhere and then walking back, often carrying heavy bags etc., sometimes from many streets away (I still, genuinely, have nightmares about parking in Chelsea so far away from my home that I lost my car) I do know exactly what you are talking about - I moved to ED partly to escape that problem with off-street parking. However the great difference between Chelsea and Battersea/ Clapham was that without residents parking in the last 2 I always eventually found somewhere, and didn't have to get out by 8.00 to move the car to somewhere else. It was resident's parking in Chelsea which was the complete (see above) nightmare. I have experienced the full range of horrors, if I lived in Melbourne Grove I wouldn't want resident's parking with all that that brings (narrow zones, hiked fees, constant controlled area creep).

I suspect that if commuters are an issue, then they are coming to ED station to reduce their travel costs by coming in at a 'lower' zone - if they can't do that then they will simply access the trains at earlier stations - so the 'trains less congested' claim will be simply rubbish - the difference being that rather than having them on the same platform as you to contest space on the train, they will already be on the train (and the seats)and you will have less chance to contest. Why on earth do you think that making parking less easy around ED will stop people going to work by train? And as for commuters who can't be a*sed to walk a bit further - as you get older and frailer you might find that long hikes to the station become less appealing - or should use of ED station only be available to the very local or the fit? If the turkeys in Melbourne Grove vote for Christmas then soon it will come to all parts of ED, and all our necks will be on the seasonal block (except mine, as I have off street parking for 3 cars and my property value will soar, so thanks, turkeys).

the first chapter of his phd on it which was not backed up anywhere else Too late for your husband to follow this advice - but if you have broadband access it's a really good idea to e-mail yourself such things as PhD chapters, dissertations, any key work documents which might take time to re-write (gmail and many others offer 2GB storage for free) - that way theft (or drive failure) are not a complete and unmitigated disaster. This also protects against such things as house fires, where locally stored back-ups may be just as vulnerable as the originals. If you save materal as .pdf files and have a Kindle you can also 'send' these via Amazon to your Kindle - another back-up opportunity.

James Baraber wrote:- BUT this system is based on national government policy developed over many decades So were the death penalty for murderers (and others) and imprisonment for male homosexuals and failed suicides. Luckily we decided to dump those bits of 'government policy developed over many decades (indeed, 100s of years, so surely even more sacrosanct!)'. Praying in aid tradition or past practice is the last refuge of someone deeply uncomfortable with the current validity of their argument. If a faith school wants to expand at public expence it should stop excluding members of the public on the basis of their (lack of or different) faith. If I opened a 'catholics only get first choice of a seat, oh and by the way there will never be enough seats for non-catholics to be admitted ' restaurant, even with my own, let alone public, money, I would be in breach of current discrimination legislation. And that anti-discrimiation legislation has some history of government policy development behind it. Edited to say 'This isn't an anti-catholic thing, by the way, but anti (any) publically funded faith school.'

'Lost my horn., lost my horn, found my horn... gorn' as Flanders and Swann had it. Sorry for your loss.

I have no problems with people who want to worship the tooth fairy and want to pay to educate the children of other people who want to worship the tooth fairy (and force their children to worship her) setting up and running their own schools; I object to non tooth fairy worshipers being obliged to co-fund this nonsense. I particularly object to strange variants of tooth fairy worshipers who believe she spins widershins rather than otherwise and set themselves over above other variants, excluding tooth fairy non-widershins believers from their education bonanza - especially if I and the non-widershins believers are part paying for it. If you want a sectarian religious education, pay for it (all) yourself or with your fellow sectarians.

I wonder whether the locsl crime statistics will be picking this one up by postcode? Not of course that he has been charged, so not yet, if ever, a crime.

About Diavalo style range extenders - I believe one problem is caused by people who have more than one mains circuit (for instance upstairs and downstairs) - if your initial connection is on circuit 1 and you then try to 'tap into' circuit 2 the signal effectively is attenuated through your fuse box - it isn't all part of the same continuous circuit. This may make it less effective.

Franklyn's?

They work at 1:30 so that they can hear leaks more easily - normally at that time flowing water sounds are not going to be associated with 'normal' water usage (i.e. washing etc.). Additionally, since the water flowing sounds are quite difficult to hear over e.g. traffic noise they chose a time when the environment is quieter.

You may well be right that they are suspicious people - however Thames Water is currently 'listening' for leaks - they use a rod to do this, placing it on the road-side stop-cock and listening for water flowing. They do this 'out of hours' so they don't pick-up the normal flow of household use. At that time of night a torch allows them to see into the channel where the stop-cock is. They may also be checking house-numbers (with a torch) where they suspect a leak is. They come back during the day to check again, this time with the householder making sure taps aren't running etc. So it is just possible that what you saw was 'kosher', although their subsequent behaviour does seem odd. Maybe they were pretending to be leak-checkers. Thames Water could probably confirm if they had people out in that area last night.

Loz Thank you for that useful exposition of what is a complex area of traffic law. Part of the purpose of box junctions was to ensure that traffic didn't queue across a junction thus impeding people turning right across the junction (or, if lights had changed, blocking flow across your route). Hence the point made earlier that putting a box where traffic simple entered a main road (from a bus park) didn't fall into the normal range of box junction objectives.

You do, I think, need to be aware that all the things, parking restrictions, bus lanes, boxed junctions etc. are initially designed (and intended) to be restrictions upon our freedom for the greater good, to aid safetly, traffic flow etc. When they become wheezes designed to act as revenue generators (i.e. where our freedoms are being reduced so that 'the management' can make money out of us) then your pious 'don't break the law and you won't get fined' attitude smacks of fellow travelling and 5th column work to me. I am entirely happy to abide within the law, when I think that law is being applied for its original and intended (by the legislators whom I elect) purpose. I will vote for parties who propose raisng taxes when they do so overtly (possibly) - but when officials or elected members use the power of the existing law to raise revenues covertly and through the back-door then I see no issue with complaining and calling it unfair. There are increasing numbers of examples of officials imposing fines on people because they can, not because their restrictions are actually to anyone's benefit other than as covert taxes, taxes actually on our freedom. Laws are not there to be 'obeyed' without thought or consideration. Too many societies have sleep-walked their way into being unfree by doing so.

This may help clarify - from WikiP but I believe accurate:- The Army Cadet Force (ACF) is a British youth organisation that offers progressive training in a multitude of the subjects from military training to adventurous training (such as Outward Bound) and first aid, at the same time as promoting achievement, discipline, and good citizenship, to boys and girls aged 12 to 18 and 9 months years of age. Its sister organisation, the Combined Cadet Force provides similar training within various schools. It has connections with the training of the British Army. Although sponsored by the Ministry of Defence and being very similar in structure and activity, the ACF is not a branch of the British Armed Forces, and as such cadets are not subject to military 'call up'. A proportion of cadets do, however, go on to enlist in the armed forces in later life, and many of the organisation's leaders - formally termed 'Cadet Force Adult Volunteers', or informally 'Adult Instructors' - can come from a previous cadet service or military background. However, these days most ACF organisations welcome any person wishing to volunteer, especially those people with skills such as adventure training, outdoor pursuits, teachers, people with medical skills and persons showing an interest in enthusing young people to become more active. The Army Cadet Force Association (ACFA), which today is responsible for the guidance of the Army Cadet Force, and through many committees acts in an advisory role to the Ministry of Defence and other Government bodies on matters connected with the ACF,[3] is a registered charity.[4] The Army Cadet Force is also a member of The National Council for Voluntary Youth Services (NCVYS),[5] as an organisation with a voluntary and community youth focus. So the CCF is specifically schools based, the ACF is for the same age group but school independent. You may have been at a school and encouraged to join a local ACF force because your school did not support its own CCF.