Jump to content

Confused52

Members
  • Content count

    276
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    17

Confused52 last won the day on July 19

Confused52 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

52 Excellent

About Confused52

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Westbrook

Recent Profile Visitors

868 profile views
  1. Congratulations - Cliff.

    I agree Davy. I fail to understand the argument that it its done to encourage others to come forward since they may be fake, like the fabled Nick, and it sounds to me to be really close to perverting the course of justice.
  2. WBC You're joking!

    Apologies for the Off-Topic post ----- About the black cab lark, well it never did require that the driver carried straw! The requirement was to feed the horse in the street only with food from the drivers hand..... it was intended to stop cabbies blocking others from picking up fares. It was ineffective it you had a horseless carriage unless you fed someone else's horse! It was finally removed from the original (London Hackney Carriage Act 1831) Act in 1976 but they didn't change the heading of the section (51), perhaps for fun, which still says "Improperly standing with carriage, or feeding horses in the street; refusing to give way to or obstructing any other driver or depriving him of his fare; penalty 20s" . The rule (yes I mean rule here) about headings in Acts of Parliament is that they don't form part of the Act, so the requirement doesn't exist and is one of those urban myths.
  3. WBC You're joking!

    No Sid, No. In Bill's case they are not rules at all. They are in fact contractual terms, applying to the implicit parking contract made by Bill when he entered upon the Private land owned by WBC for the purpose of parking. In that regard no person is responsible for enforcement in the way that you suggest as being a duty. Enforcement is not obligatory at all. Further it is not a fine that Bill was asked to pay (they are for on-street parking). The fee claimed is I believe in essence liquidated damages for the breach of contract. As such it represents the reasonable costs incurred as a loss by the council in losing an adjacent parking fee or fees and cost of recovery of the debt. That has been the position in the Supreme Court in similar cases. This is no different to a supermarket charging for parking on a white line at 10pm on a Monday night at ASDA Westbrook. Would PJ then have considered it only proper that he should pay extra, which in that case would start at the value of the average shopping bill over the whole day at ASDA!! Further the value of the car parking spaces is currently set at zero if you go to the market, therefore the recoverable damages are zero and the council should not be charging for recovering the zero cost. If ADSA or Tesco did this they would be accused of being Rip-Off merchants. The council has no special position here, WBC are being Rip-Off merchants. Indeed they are using assets which the public paid for to rip-the same public off, a situation that normally gets the usual suspects going when it applies to the railways or other privatised assets.
  4. NHS again -

    The scans themselves are sometimes done by agencies supplied as a rental deal with equipment being loaned for days or weeks. Therefore the scans have to be in a transportable form and the specification of interchange are well formed and public. The barriers are just organisational. The answer was demonstrated to me at Manchester Dental Hospital years ago. On checking in the clerical assistant gave me my notes and told me to take them with me to show me everyone I saw then hand them back before I left. Not practical with MRI scans etc. but the principle that the notes belong with the patient , i.e. today are stored away from the organisation doing the treatment, is important. Hospitals can cover up unnecessary delay because the reports aren't chased by the system just filed. I have heard many cases where appointments go missing in the post and patients have to start again. Not sure about GPs. Having a doctor that is the one you always see does mean that they could remember what other matters you had discussed and shorten consultations. However this is being eroded by long waiting times and 10 mins. max consultations as the hours they work drop. The problems are more deep seated than just organisation of IT, for which the NHS has a massive set up already.
  5. WBC You're joking!

    Well you might then explain why enforcing the requirement to park in the bay only is in the public interest in an almost empty, and by the sound of it about to close car park. They already had the parking fee so the penalty ticket is only needed to discourage behaviour that might stop others from parking but that was evidently not the case. There is a requirement on councils to not treat parking fines as a source of revenue but this case suggests that might well be what was happening here. The rules are there for a reason but when the reason ceases to be applicable why not cease to enforce it. Save the money by not employing the attendant during those hours perhaps. I wouldn't mind betting that the data protection registration for the car park doesn't say that the cameras are to be used to enforce parking controls and rather that they are for crime prevention. Parking over a white line in a car park not being a crime if the parking firm use the footage to take action against their staff or the public for parking infringements they may well be breaking the law. I agree with Dizzy's underlying point about using common sense, the council just have a bit of a problem with common sense and prefer the officious route.
  6. NHS again -

    You do know the last time it was tried that it was a disaster though don't know. On the principle of if you don't learn from history it will repeat itself why would you propose doing it again?
  7. NHS again -

    So the Government via NHS England should be harder on the GPs and their Union the BMA is what you suggest. Well Gordon Brown put their pay up to the point where they could afford to work part time and when Jeremy Hunt tried to tighten up the contract all hell was let loose. The situation was made worse by George Osbourne pandering to the fat cat pension complaints and seizing the opportunity of capping the Pension Lifetime allowance, after that all of those GPs over the new limit of 1.00 million ( a pension of 50k pa ) started to retire rather than pay extra tax on their pension savings if they carried on working. All this listening to soundbites does the public no good at all does it? Your comment about political will makes no sense when viewed in the light of what has actually happened because it has been political will that got us here. It was high taxation on the rich and idolising the NHS that caused our current problem and all that is on offer is more of the same!
  8. NHS again -

    Excellent find Asp. So one might express that as doctors appointments numbers cut back by life-style choices of new GPs who are paid so much they don't need the hours. Shocking because the calculations of doctors needed are based on the mix of patients ages and sex giving a number of appointments divided by the number of appointments per doctor based on heuristics for each group practice but the doctors are undermining that and effectively bribing the government to employ more of them on the inflated pay that caused the problem.
  9. NHS again -

    Well the snippy answer is that we are borrowing billions like last time and it still has to be paid back but now the fraction of GDP going on the NHS is colossally more than it was then and the money we might spent on housing is going on foreign aid and in work benefits. Remember that after the war we were spending on the armed forces pretending we could retain an empire (so it probably isn't down to defence spending growth) as well as throwing money away supporting an unsupportable pound dollar exchange rate after being forced to support convertibility, thereby frittering away Marshal Aid of which we got the largest share. The starting positions are vastly different and your comparison is a false one. The great time you relate to also had continued rationing and not rebuilding industry as I recall.
  10. Sha, You obviously failed to notice the existential threat to the Library, Dentists, Chemists and Play Groups facing the Westbrook Centre with the connivance of WBC. I am sure PJ has noticed that one of his local councillors was backing the destruction whilst another tried to oppose it. I don't know if he engaged in that issue but the development of the town certainly affects Callands with a vengeance, notably the catastrophic growth of Omega and the by-pass of stoppages on the M6 which will afflict Cromwell Avenue when the Western Link is built. Westbrook as a whole has been living with this for decades whilst the south of the town resembled sleepy hollow, but the latter has now woken up after decades of not caring about anything outside the Town Centre apart from itself.
  11. Brexit

    Davy, they are only supposed to change to make you worse off with sufficient notice to let you compensate by saving, but somehow the message doesn't always get through. In the case you quoted I have sympathy with your friend's disappointment. What he should have got, assuming it was after April 2016, was 30/35 of 155.65pw which is 133.41 compared with the previous full basic state pension of 119.35pw. So only a smaller increase but an increase nonetheless. If he has additional pension (SERPS, S2P) the amount up to the difference between the full New State Pension and the Basic State Pension (Both will continue for many years) will be uprated in line with the triple lock and any above that only increases with CPI, which is lower in most years. If he has sufficient money he should investigate buying voluntary contributions for the extra five years as they can still be obtained at earlier rates in same cases. As for the question where did the money go ........ there is no State Pension Fund it went on paying other peoples state pensions like it does every year. The change to 30 years was made by Gordon Brown to benefit women and the recent change didn't make people worse off but they felt as if they had lost something. Those who had contracted out thought they were getting an increase that turned out to be illusory. The problem is that it is all very complicated and the reality is that the new system will be simpler and hence cheaper to run. I found that when I looked for advice on how to calculate the amount of Additional Pension (SERPS,S2P) and graduated pension someone was entitled to the advice ended up as ask the Pension Service (and trust them) because there had been so many changes over the years that it was too difficult to explain. Let's hope there will be more stability and less hype in future.
  12. Brexit

    The ones I've seen make less conservative assumptions than I did. Your nephews will have found out about them by now though. Auto-enrolment came in with the New State Pension in essence. The ills of the past cannot be put right by changing the future system. However it is important that folks do save because the New Flat Rate State Pension is not as generous as the Basic State Pension plus Additional Pension other than for the lowest earners. Hence the people who dominate your thinking are actually better off but the majority are worse off without an occupational pension and they should take the opportunity. PS I don't need a financial advisor thanks, but your nephews sound as if they might.
  13. Brexit

    Firstly Auto-enrolment means that everyone has to opt out not opt-in so your first point has no merit. The regular employment point is valid but that is true for all pensions other than the State Pension. If you get a full state pension with only 35 years work you get almost three quarters of the uplift from the private pension. Of course some will get less but I only suggested a majority would get the full benefit. You quote zero hour (2.5%) and then the homeless and unemployed. The problem is that you first argue that hardly anyone will get the extra pension, I show that the majority will get a benefit from the pension and then you argue that not everyone will get it. Yes just a majority like I said!
  14. Brexit

    Obs, your pension rant is not rational. For someone leaving education now with an auto-enrolment pension at 21 with a qualification (that is most of them) they would get a private pension equal in value to the state pension, so doubling retirement earnings. This assumes returns of one percent above inflation plus costs which is not unrealistic. That also assumes making the minimum payment to release the employers contribution and working to 68 with a reducing income from 63 onwards and that their pay is the current average in real terms taken over their whole career, again not overambitious. The problem is that left wing victim creation is able to get away with talking rubbish without being tested. If you disagree show your assumptions and or working!
  15. PJ, according to WBC's NNDR data it is owned by Park Equity Invest Limited, as is the building next door on Bridge Street (was Prime Time). Park Equity Invest is owned by JM Parking Ltd (of Warrington) and another company with the same directors recently, as in April 2018, took out a mortgage on the former Packet House (137 Bridge Street). I recommend that you simply follow the trail for yourself at the WBC Open Data pages and Companies House. It would seem likely that in the fullness of time a planning application may be made regarding the site and therefore if any councillor makes any comments here they could find themselves unable to take part in decision making. So don't expect a response from Steve.
×