Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Ha - best title for a thread in the family room ever????


OK - so my 4 year old has this Beauty and the Beast Playset - sort of Polly Pocket sized, with a prince who 'transforms into a beast' by putting a different head & body over the top of him.


The problem is that 1 of the princes legs has broken off and the other day she said "I don't want to have a 1 legged prince Mummy" which made my heart ache.


So I thought, here is a good thing for Santa to put in her stocking & went on Ebay and thought I was so clever to manage to buy a second hand set of the same toy, with a new prince in it. Except in my rush I didn't read the description properly...and the new prince only has 1 arm. ARRGGGHHHH.


I am a Mummy failure. It's official.


It seems you can only buy these playsets new in America, and P&P is insane from there.


I don't suppose anyone, magically has one of these Princes hanging around that they no longer want? Ideally one with

all his limbs intact? It's a long shot...but hey, I'm a desperate woman. Don't we all want a Prince?


She did tell me the other day that one day she was going to marry a beast. I do hope not!


Yours, desperately.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/27374-princebeast-needed-urgently/
Share on other sites

OK - at the risk of making the prince into some sort of Frankenstein; is limb transplanation an option? I don't have a clue what these toys are but if you have one missing an arm and one missing a leg could you do some minor surgery thus creating a whole one?

I have PMed you another possible solution.

Michele

Oh no. Love the frankenstein response, had thought of that too! Hs disney store stopped selling them?


We have a hideous plastic barbie horse that had a long mane and tail, got totally knotted, was a ball of sticky fibres, so back in the summer I gave it a haircut. 4yo daughter wept and wailed. The other week she found it in the back of a cupboard (had hidden it as was fed up with the complaints and sad eyes) and got upset again.


Had taken the line that we don't chuck stuff out just cos it's not perfect anymore, but caved in and ordered a new horse for xmas.


The new one has arrived and turns out has no bloody hair! It has plastic moulding smooth mane and solid tail. She will not be at all impressed!

  • 2 weeks later...

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

    • 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.
    • Actually I don't think so. What caused the problem was the ban on councils using the revenues from sales to build more houses. Had councils been able to reinvest in more housing then we would have had a boom in building. And councils would have been relieved, through the sales, of the cost of maintaining old housing stock. Thatcher believed that council tenants didn't vote Conservative, and home owners did. Which may have been, at the time a correct assumption. But it was the ban on councils building more from the sales revenues which was the real killer here. Not the sales themselves. 
    • I agree with Jenjenjen. Guarantees are provided for works and services actually carried out; they are not an insurance policy for leaks anywhere else on the roof. Assuming that the rendering at the chimney stopped the leak that you asked the roofer to repair, then the guarantee will cover that rendering work. Indeed, if at some time in the future it leaked again at that exact same spot but by another cause, that would not be covered. Failure of rendering around a chimney is pretty common so, if re-rendering did resolve that leak, there is no particular reason to link it to the holes in the felt elsewhere across the roof. 
    • Hey, I am on the first floor and I am directly impacted if roof leaks. We got a roofing company to do repair work which was supposed to be guaranteed. However, when it started leaking again, we were informed that the guarantee is just for a new roof and not repair work. Each time the company that did the repair work came out again over the next few years, we had to pay additional amounts. The roof continues to leak, so I have just organised another company to fix the roof instead, as the guarantee doesn't mean anything. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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