Outrageous (stomps foot)

[Mick Mac]

Yes. Most au pairs are salaried employees of the household employer and pay tax like anyone else.

[Santerme]

I feel sorry for the pensioner 10 minutes down the road who had the policeman not had to stop for an unnecessary nuisance would have saved her from being mugged.

That's my Sliding Doors theory anyway.

[SeanMacGabhann]

Not that I don't think it was a petty thing anyway, but the whole mugging grannies theory really doesn't work. You hear it all on the time on phone-ins

But if police were to genuinely ignore all infractions of the law bar mugging old grannies you would be surprised how chaotic things would quickly become

[woofmarkthedog]

UK Tax & National Insurance

The pocket money paid to an au pair normally falls under the threshold for tax and national insurance. However, as many nationalities are able to visit the UK and undertake roles which are not official au pair placements, it will be necessary to check requirements regarding living and working in the UK, and also tax and National Insurance liabilities where more money is earned. The PAYE and National Insurance Threshold for tax year 2009/10 is ?110 per week.

An aside yes, but lets get the facts right> I mean "Lenka" may come from a previously "In triplicate " bureaucratic utopia. "Please for me I must understand rules of such crimes & what not"

W**F

*inks stamps in preparation....next*

[Ladymuck]

Dear dulwichmum,

Joking aside...

Cycling on footways is prohibited by Section 72 of the Highway Act 1835, amended by Section 85(1) of the Local Government Act 1888. This is punishable by a fixed penalty notice of ?30 under Section 51 and Schedule 3 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988.

Assuming the cycling took place on a footway (a pavement at the side of a carriageway), as opposed to a cycle track, a pavement, a footpath, or highway, then, on the face of it, Section 51 and Schedule 3 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 appear to apply. Moreover, the legislation makes no exceptions for small wheeled or children's cycles, so even a child riding on a footway is breaking the law. However, when on 1st August 1999 new legislation came into force allowing a fixed penalty notice to be served on anyone breaching s72, the Home Office issued guidance on how the new legislation should be applied. It indicated that: it should only be used where a cyclist is riding in a manner that may endanger others.

Also, (cut and pasted from the internet):

At the time Home Office Minister Paul Boateng issued a letter stating that: "the introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of traffic and who show consideration to other pavement users when doing so. Chief police officers, who are responsible for enforcement, acknowledge that many cyclists, particularly children and young people, are afraid to cycle on the road, sensitivity and careful use of police discretion is required." Almost identical advice has since been issued by the Home Office with regards the use of fixed penalty notices by CSOs and wardens.

So Dulwichmum, you need to ask yourself: were your little poppet and au pair riding in a manner that may endanger others? If you believe they were not - then you could try appealing against the FPN...but hurry...there are usually deadlines in which to do so.

Hope this helps. xx

[Y'man]

Ladymuck,

presumably, all this means that the sprog should have been given a ticket too. Mumsie wumsie got off lightly and shouldn't be complaining. Two for the price of one!

[Ladymuck]

Y'man Wrote:

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

> Ladymuck,

> presumably, all this means that the sprog

> should have been given a ticket too. Mumsie

> wumsie got off lightly and shouldn't be

> complaining. Two for the price of one!

Now now Y'man...give the poor Lady a break...I can just visualise her Ladyship sprawled out (attired in the finest silk of course) on her chaise longue...Housekeeper applying cold compresses to her Ladyship's forehead, whilst the maid attempts to gently fan away the stresses caused by this most unfortunate of incidents, all while the boot-boy, massages her Ladyship's beautifully pedicured feet! Poor soul...it's all too much you know...

*again, tries very hard not to laugh*

[Mick Mac]

Mick Mac Wrote:

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

> Yes. Most au pairs are salaried employees of the

> household employer and pay tax like anyone else.

I meant nannies.

[Y'man]

She's had her break, as mentioned. How's your Motorway driving?

[Ladymuck]

Y'man Wrote:

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

> She's had her break, as mentioned. How's your

> Motorway driving?

Eh? Sorry, you've lost me...

[dulwichmum]

Moi aussi!

[Mick Mac]

dulwichmum Wrote:

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

> Moi aussi!

Really DM. I thought you were Argentinian Irish. But an aussie - that explains a lot.

[woofmarkthedog]

Scene one.

*DM is in bed with a headscarf and darkened glasses on*

"Hmmm..mmm..y "

"Sorry dear, whatttt was that ?"

"A mousey ? " She tries to speak, but her cheeks are padded with cotton wool

"What ? Oh a mousey you say....OK...Okkkk...I think she's feeling better now ehh D M , there's a girl "

* DM waves regally

( We all exit the darkened room , backwards )

[Y'man]

Ladymuck Wrote:

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

> Y'man Wrote:

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

> -----

> > She's had her break, as mentioned. How's your

> > Motorway driving?

>

>

> Eh? Sorry, you've lost me...

Apologies, obviously not the same Ladymuck that writes in The Telegraph and who thinks that driving in the middle lane of a motorway is cool!

[intexasatthe moment]

If they were " cominig out of the school gates " then I assume that this was at the end of a school day.

The pavements around both Dulwich Village school sites and the Hamlet are always packed at this time.

Often with mums with babies in pushchairs ,toddlers in tow .

Madness ,and I think very inconsiderate, to be trying to cycle through the throng.

Really not the best time and place to be giving your little one cycling practice.

Just my view - as a cyclist.

[Ladymuck]

Y'man Wrote:

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

>How's your Motorway driving?

Ladymuck Wrote:

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

> > Eh? Sorry, you've lost me...

Y'man Wrote:

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

>Apologies, obviously not the same Ladymuck that

> writes in The Telegraph and who thinks that

> driving in the middle lane of a motorway is cool!

No not me...but someone is using my name? The audacity of the woman! The Telegraph of all papers!

*picks up phone to commence civil proceedings...*

[Y'man]

Ladymuck Wrote:

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

> Y'man Wrote:

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

> -----

> >How's your Motorway driving?

>

>

> Ladymuck Wrote:

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

> -----

> > > Eh? Sorry, you've lost me...

>

>

> Y'man Wrote:

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

> -----

> >Apologies, obviously not the same Ladymuck that

> > writes in The Telegraph and who thinks that

> > driving in the middle lane of a motorway is

> cool!

>

>

> No not me...but someone is using my name? The

> audacity of the woman! The Telegraph of all

> papers!

>

> *picks up phone to commence civil proceedings...*

Take my name down as a witness.

[Ladymuck]

Y'man Wrote:

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

> Take my name down as a witness.

Indeed! I am glad you appreciate the seriousness of the situation.

*laughs head off*