Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Jah Lush Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> the-e-dealer Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Well then it WAS partly their fault they should

> > have kicked someone incompetent out NOT

> encouraged

> > you to keep them on.

>

> Yes, but would it have made good television?


xxxxxxx


Actually they didn't cover the problems with DJKQ at all because it wasn't that kind of programme.


She appeared extremely briefly in one part of it (IIRC) demonstrating how to put paint on a wall :))


I thought that was quite funny because her painting technique was idiosyncratic to say the least, she didn't seem to have heard of cutting in.

>

> .

> .

> .

>

> Sent by Osmosis.

ratty Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Does this thread make anyone else slightly

> uncomfortable?



Mmm..... I am a little surprised the site allows such an undefended diatribe against a trader - but then again I guess nobody has named the individual/company.

ratty Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Does this thread make anyone else slightly

> uncomfortable?


I think probably (despite having, umm, egged it on a leetle - not that Sue needed much encouragement) my opinion is now that it (the thread) ought to go - at least until the other party makes an appearance.


As another sagely poster (not connected with DJKQ) has pointed out.. there may be other, well, issues which I don't think most amused bystanders (including myself) on here would want to exacerbate, were they to be the case.


That might be a load of old guff, of course, but maybe better safe than sorry on this one?

*Bob* Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> my opinion is now that it (the thread) ought to go

> - at least until the other party makes an

> appearance.


xxxxxxxxx


Well the other party is conspicuous by their absence, despite having posted on their football thread relatively recently.


Perhaps in due course the OP may expand further on their experience of the trader in question.


All I would say is, there are always two sides to every issue. Which is why I said that I would abide by the decision of an independent objective mediator. DJKQ refused mediation. Why?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Vans are restricted to one hour a day 8:30 to 9:30 and have to be pre-booked.  So long as you went with and were able to show the right ID then I doubt it would be an issue unless the builders van is emblazoned with their branding as businesses aren't allowed to use it.
    • Perhaps they would run into the issue that Lambeth had if they put it on the  Rye - maybe they would need planning permission for change of use if more than 28 days of permitted development are used up for all the other events plus this. So perhaps emphasising that the two areas are distinct from each other actually helps the council.
    • I think the council could make more of that too. Sell a ticketed event with a local celebrity turning the lights on, followed by a street party with christmas carols and a christmas pop song cover band.
    • When we had lots of rubble to dispose of, we hired a zip an and took it. Didn't have to pay, but they don't allow vans in Sundays from memory 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...