Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Asset Wrote:

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

> incorrect use of apostrophes

> hahahahahahahahahahahahaha, sorry.


I'm with you, Asset. It drives me up the wall.


Its - possessive use. No apostrophe. The dog eats its bone.

It's - shortened version of it is. It's raining today.


How f*cking hard is it?

Asset Wrote:

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

> incorrect use of apostrophes

> hahahahahahahahahahahahaha, sorry.


I'm with you, Asset. It drives me up the wall.


Its - possessive use. No apostrophe. The dog eats its bone.

It's - shortened version of it is. It's raining today.


How f*cking hard is it?



Oh I did it on mine, apologies.


still very easily done when you are typing and elsewhere in your head.


pedant :)

I can understand the odd typo. It's when it's on a printed sign or a website. Someone should have checked it. (Abbey's website at the mo has this mistake...looking for a new mortgage deal and spotted it tonight so it's fresh in my mind.) My post was not meant as a personal dig. :)) Pedant? Moi? Perhaps I should get out more? Then I can get my blood truly boiling on public transport...

elfy, I was joshing, I found it funny in my twisted way to call someone a pedant on a thread about petty annoyances.


No apologies though for crapness of this posts content, typed on my phone, in bed, with cats arse in face again.


How do you all feel about semi colons by the way?

Random Game Show irritations:-

1/ Deal or No Deal: Person does not gamble and takes,say,?5,000...they play on and when the last 2 boxes ""would have been" either ?5 or ?20,000 they,when asked what they 2would2 have done if they had continued and not taken the money say:

"I would have gambled!"..Yeah RIGHT!B)

2/ Millionaire: 85% Audience tell him/her the answer and because he/she did not know themselves they hesitate over whether 85% all independently say the right answer!

3/ Millionaire:Contestants don't know the answer and then gofor a "50/50" Whats the point if you haven't a clue,by your own admission.

4/ Millionaire:Contestants who take a "50/50" to reduce the odds for their "phone-a-friend"..Do you think they are going to guess witgh YOUR money???...either they know the answer or not!..Wasted lifeline,again.

Then when the contestants get to the real money they bemoan the fact that they have no lifelines left!

5/ Millionaire:Contestants who waste lifelines when they are virtually certain that they do know the answer!

Seamusmac shoots and scores!


Tonyfromburbs - you missed the Millionaire one that gets me most - IF you are going to go for a 50/50, do NOT say out loud "I think it's between C & B" before going for a 50/50 only to find the two choices left are the same two you just gave away

Bloomin' pushchairs/buggys on buses and the attitude of the mothers that it's their RIGHT to bring the ruddy thing on board AND put it in the area they think is ONLY for them even on a packed bus followed by insulted dear old ladies for pointing out back in their day they had to manage without such luxuries, resulting in silly "21 yr old boys" joining in...


*breathes*


Mothers with babies taking up two seats on a bus (the second seat meaning the one you are already sitting on), elbows, baby sludge/food and rubbish everywhere AND having the cheek to explode at you when you want to get off the bus as if it's your fault for being in the way! Bloomin' 'eck how much space do they want!?!

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

Seamusmac shoots and scores!

IF you are going to go for a

50/50, do NOT say out loud "I think it's between C

& B" before going for a 50/50 only to find the two

choices left are the same two you just gave away


Agreed,and thats why it can NOT be "random". As you know the odds are 3/1 against the 2 options that they mention coming out(if we assume one of those "2" is the correct answer)..I was say over the hundreds of shows that I have seen around 50%+ of the time the "2" mentioned miraculously appears,accompanied by CT's "Oh! No!"...:X

Good spot, seamusmac.


KK, um isn't it someone's right to bring a buggy on board if there's space? I mean, presumably mother and baby need to get to wherever they're going just as much as you do? Have you ever tried standing on a packed bus holding a baby and hanging onto a folded buggy? It's really scary.


Agree re: the 2 seats though.


*awaits cut-and-paste post from Keef re: parents attacking everyone in the world who dares to criticise them*

"Have you ever tried standing on a packed bus holding a baby and hanging onto a folded buggy?"


Yes. It wasn't that long ago that unfolded prams weren't allowed on buses and was completely impossible on a Routemaster anyway. It's tricky, yes, but perfectly doable.


I was on a bus last week and there were two mothers with pushchairs who had to give way to a wheelchair. Absolute chaos ensued.


Wouldn't it be wise for one pram per bus to be the limit?


My absolute bugbear on buses is children sitting while adults stand. If they are too young to stand, sit them on your lap - if we don't inculcate good manners at a young age, what hope is there?


Right, I'll get me weasel and go to the Old Fogies Thread.

I've only done it once, and it scared the life out of me, because one hand for buggy and one for baby meant none for hanging on. I don't think it's a good idea at all.


Mothers with pushchairs should give way to wheelchairs, that's what the signs say. And most drivers do only allow only one or two - again, perfectly legit. I've quite often had to wait for the next bus, and I have no argument with that. But I do think that people with buggies have as much right as anyone else to travel, and it gets wearisome when able-bodied young people grumble and cast black looks at those of us who cause inconvenience to their swift journey. People are very quick to moan about the elderly, the young, the encumbered, when a little bit of courtesy and patience on all sides - and yes that certainly does include those who are being the nuisance, the Us in my argument - would make everything much more pleasant. I don't mind apologising for taking up a lot of space, or for having to ask people to move out of the way so I can get off. But I hate having to apologise for existing in my inconvenient way.

Melbourne's Wrote:

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

> Men who sit with legs wide apart - no matter how

> big or small, its very uncomfortable to close legs

> together squashing the furniture, especially on

> train seats. Why do women like to keep their legs

> closed?


it would be too drafty otherwise.

thumbs aloft for that post Moos -


"a little bit of courtesy and patience on all sides " will help us with most things


Now, how about all of those people who huddle around teh space between teh doors and the bottom of the stairs when there is acres of space upstairs? And then give you the skunk eye when you have to pass through them from upstairs!

my big pa, is people deciding to park beside me when there are hundreds of spaces elsewhere, eg on the weekly trip to sainbos, i,ll park right down the back where there is plenty of room, as i,m sick of other eejits banging their doors into mine, there are dozens of empty bays yet inevitably when i come out some prick has parked in the bay beside me. why?
Oh dear, I feel got at now. I did sit with a totally strange baby on my lap from Brixton to Peckham. The point being that the mother seemed particularly inept and it didn't occur to her to fold up the pushchair when there was no baby in it to alleviate the congestion problem.

how can you have all missed the worst public transport annoyance of them all -

people who get on the train before you've had a chance to get off it!! believe it or not there are people out there who do this, and i swear one day i'm gonna be petulent and repeatedly side-step in their way on purpose, not allowing them on until they get the idea. - however i'll probly just bottle it up for the time being through fear of being knifed

Jimbob said

my big pa, is people deciding to park beside me when there are hundreds of spaces elsewhere, eg on the weekly trip to sainbos, i,ll park right down the back where there is plenty of room, as i,m sick of other eejits banging their doors into mine, there are dozens of empty bays yet inevitably when i come out some prick has parked in the bay beside me. why?


Always happens to me, regardless of where I park and how busy the supermarket is. You would think that baby seats and child seats on both sides would deter people also, it is very difficult strapping them in when you can't open the doors very wide.

It's great when a parent and child space is free but otherwise I am doomed to have a car that attracts others like flies to s**t.

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

    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
    • You can get a card at the till, though, to get the discount. You don't have to carry it with you (or load it onto your phone), you can just get a different card each time. Not sure what happens if they notice 🤣
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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