Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The vehicle was lifted up on a ramp today throwing some light on the matter. The 'thing' left hanging off was the mid-section silencer. The catalytic converter was embedded in the missing length of pipe.


So this was a straightforward theft. A nice little earner for the thief given current precious metals prices and a ?500 repair bill for the owner.

  • 3 weeks later...

Dark Knight Wrote:

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

> The vehicle was lifted up on a ramp today throwing

> some light on the matter. The 'thing' left hanging

> off was the mid-section silencer. The catalytic

> converter was embedded in the missing length of

> pipe.

>

> So this was a straightforward theft. A nice little

> earner for the thief given current precious metals

> prices and a ?500 repair bill for the owner.


?500 for a new catalytic converter and exhaust? That's seems very expensive. It was much less when the cat and exhaust on my wife's C3 were replaced. The cat itself was just ?80 for example. I go to a very good local independent garage.

  • 3 months later...

DulwichFox Wrote:

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

> Someone gets their car vandalised and some users

> find it amusing and take the 'P'

>

> Don't we just have some lovely people on here.

>

> DulwichFox


One would expect that you categorise yourself amongst the 'lovely people' on this forum

Better to have some light hearted humour than Daily Mail ranting I say. Theft for selling for scrap has always happened (no excuse of course). Lead of church roofs in my childhood. Controls on scrap yards may reduce some of the resale market.


You can hopefully get an indie to do it fairly cheap or even DIY.


For Prius's help is at hand : https://www.ebay.co.uk/i/233352308006?chn=ps&norover=1&mkevt=1&mkrid=710-134428-41853-0&mkcid=2&itemid=233352308006&targetid=595627705193&device=c&mktype=pla&googleloc=1006965&poi=&campaignid=6619152137&mkgroupid=84510981808&rlsatarget=aud-629407027585:pla-595627705193&abcId=1140496&merchantid=6995734&gclid=Cj0KCQjwi7DtBRCLARIsAGCJWBrCmV9msVOwDohd2aqIf8uUe7B60IPuyK6xhAhQerx6ByORE3vJM9saAtIUEALw_wcB

DulwichFox Wrote:

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

> Someone gets their car vandalised and some users

> find it amusing and take the 'P'

>

> Don't we just have some lovely people on here.

>




I know Peckhamgatecrasher, and yes they are lovely.


Just because somebody makes a (clever and funny) joke doesn't mean they find vandalism amusing.


Edited to remove a gender reference.

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

    • It's called The Restorative Place. Also, the Fired Earth storefront is under offer too, apparently. How exciting...!
    • Perhaps the view is that there are fewer people needing social housing in London, going forward, or to cap it as it is rather than increasing it. We already see the demographic changing.
    • But actually, replacing council housing, or more accurately adding to housing stock and doing so via expanding council estates was precisely what we should have been doing, financed by selling off old housing stock. As the population grows adding to housing built by councils is surely the right thing to do, and financing it through sales is a good model, it's the one commercial house builders follow for instance. In the end the issue is about having the right volumes of the appropriate sort of housing to meet national needs. Thatcher stopped that by forbidding councils to use sales revenues to increase housing stock. That was the error. 
    • Had council stock not been sold off then it wouldn't have needed replacing. Whilst I agree that the prohibition on spending revenue from sales on new council housing was a contributory factor, where, in places where building land is scarce and expensive such as London, would these replacement homes have been built. Don't mention infill land! The whole right to buy issue made me so angry when it was introduced and I'm still fuming 40 odd years later. If I could see it was just creating problems for the future, how come Thatcher didn't. I suspect though she did, was more interested in buying votes, and just didn't care about a scarcity of housing impacting the next generations.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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