Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2019 15:40:41 GMT
LOL
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Mar 11, 2019 17:24:25 GMT
It's not for nothing we say that some parents take their children to the supermarket to give them a good beating.
Pity they (the parents) are allowed to leave, especially as there is a mincer out back...
|
|
|
Post by julesd68 on Mar 21, 2019 10:15:35 GMT
I went into our local M+S yesterday to pick up an online order. To do this, you have to go to the back of the shop and wait by the stock room door for someone to see you and fetch your order. So I go there, and a woman inside spots me immediately but continues what she is doing for a good few minutes. So I'm just standing there like a lemon - she then opens the door and says - 'Are you alright there?' WTF??? I felt like saying, yes I'm very well thank you but I just want to collect my frickin' order! It really bugs me when people use this phrase in completely the wrong context. If I was sitting on the floor reading a book, it might have been more appropriate ...
|
|
|
Post by Slinger on Mar 29, 2019 11:13:27 GMT
Tracking information that tells you that your parcel is "out for delivery" and will be delivered by "Eduardo" between 11:00 and 12:00 No problem - popped out, back indoors by 10:30 - checked the (Parcel-farce) tracking to see how Eduardo was doing, only to find out that Eduardo had dropped by at 10:19, not left a card, not tried any of my neighbours, and buggered off again.
I then had to go through their wonderful automated system to book a redelivery as I couldn't do it online because bloody Eduardo didn't leave a card, so I had no reference number.
My new subwoofer is now arriving on Monday. Fair play to the vendor for shipping it so quickly, though. I ordered it on Wednesday evening, and it's now only Friday morning.
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Mar 29, 2019 12:04:56 GMT
Damn that Eduardo! You could have had a whole weekend of playing.
|
|
|
Post by petea on Mar 29, 2019 12:18:59 GMT
Eduardo will!
|
|
|
Post by Slinger on Mar 29, 2019 12:39:39 GMT
On the plus side, the 3m EDGE lead I ordered may not arrive until Monday, so at least I don't have to stare at the sub all weekend, not having a lead long enough to set it up. But, all the same, CURSE YOU, EDUARDO!
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on Mar 29, 2019 13:28:02 GMT
Do we have a generic name for all delivery guys now ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2019 15:33:23 GMT
Don't get me started on bloomin' Parcel-Force or any of the other useless courier firms and drivers. My latest one - I saw a van pull up on my drive, stop for about a second and then drive off. Later that day I received a text saying that they couldn't find my address.... but they were sat on my drive, bloody idiots!!!
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on Mar 29, 2019 16:06:00 GMT
Hey. *I* found your address
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on Mar 30, 2019 16:38:30 GMT
Govt Petition : stop developers netting hedges to prevent birds nesting When developers can legitimately say there are no birds nesting they can clear hedges with impunity. Hence the netting of hedges and trees to discourage. petition.parliament.uk/petitions/244233I've signed this and am spreading the word. Please do likewise
|
|
|
Post by Slinger on Mar 30, 2019 16:41:00 GMT
Govt Petition : stop developers netting hedges to prevent birds nesting When developers can legitimately say there are no birds nesting they can clear hedges with impunity. Hence the netting of hedges and trees to discourage. petition.parliament.uk/petitions/244233I've signed this and am spreading the word. Please do likewise Signed
|
|
|
Post by petea on Mar 30, 2019 16:55:25 GMT
Done.
|
|
|
Post by ChrisB on Mar 31, 2019 6:10:36 GMT
This is not fully thought through, I believe. "Removing hedges with impunity" is not correct. There is law to prevent the removal of hedges - The Hedgerows Regulations (1997).
The nets you see are generally placed on hedges that have already received a death sentence by the planners who granted permission to carry out a development. They are going to be removed, no ifs or buts.
The net is to reduce the chance of birds nesting there before the removal takes place. If this doesn't happen, then the hedge can't be removed during the nesting season.
It's still going to be removed though.
Now, I am not defending anyone's actions just pointing out how I believe it works. There is a parallel here with the felling of trees for development, so I promise I'm not siding with the developers who are ripping out hedges and trees. The real problem is that planners approve the permission to remove the hedge in the first place. The mitigation that is required for most development schemes is never replacing like with like and when it is carried out, it is never properly maintained, so it dies anyway. By that time, the planners are too busy approving other schemes to check and even if they do, they are usually unable to enforce.
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on Mar 31, 2019 10:01:54 GMT
Good point Chris. So it could already be through planning and too late
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on Mar 31, 2019 10:03:38 GMT
|
|
|
Post by petea on Mar 31, 2019 10:36:07 GMT
This is not fully thought through, I believe. "Removing hedges with impunity" is not correct. There is law to prevent the removal of hedges - The Hedgerows Regulations (1997). The nets you see are generally placed on hedges that have already received a death sentence by the planners who granted permission to carry out a development. They are going to be removed, no ifs or buts. The net is to reduce the chance of birds nesting there before the removal takes place. If this doesn't happen, then the hedge can't be removed during the nesting season. It's still going to be removed though. Now, I am not defending anyone's actions just pointing out how I believe it works. There is a parallel here with the felling of trees for development, so I promise I'm not siding with the developers who are ripping out hedges and trees. The real problem is that planners approve the permission to remove the hedge in the first place. The mitigation that is required for most development schemes is never replacing like with like and when it is carried out, it is never properly maintained, so it dies anyway. By that time, the planners are too busy approving other schemes to check and even if they do, they are usually unable to enforce. Excellemt points there, Chris. I did understand that the purpose of the netting was to prevent birds nesting in trees intended for removal due to various reasons, but got the impression from the article I read that this was being abused / subverted, especially with respect to hedgerows, by certain developers and farmers. It would certainly not do any harm to have it debated and the system put under scrutiny though I suspect. Do you know if pre-authorisation is required prior to the netting being installed?
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on Mar 31, 2019 10:53:45 GMT
Bearing in mind how much developers make there will be those taking advantage.
The field next to us has had many planning applications since the 60s. All failed. Think one went to The House of Lords.
New developer employed by the field owner has a reputation for planning approval where all others fail. 8am one Saturday morning there are tree 'surgeons' felling 50 - 100 year old trees in the field. Reason is "tidying up". Lies. They left many rubbish silver birches, dead dying, overcome with ivy.
Spoke to a local tree surgeon who said this is common practice for developers to take out all trees that could have a TPO put on them. Stupid us for not going for TPOs
Last planning application failed as usual. Field looks awful. Lots of displaced wildlife
|
|
|
Post by ChrisB on Mar 31, 2019 11:37:49 GMT
petea Pete - I'm unsure, actually. Probably not though. If people are abusing the practice, then it must be to prevent nesting there before an application is lodged, in order to give the impression that there is no impact on nesting birds. I don't see how this could be to their advantage though, because hedges are always viewed as potential nesting habitat. Even the most grossly biased Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) that a dodgy developer might submit couldn't hide that fact. Also, as I noted above, hedges are subject to their own protective legislation anyway. The practice of netting seems to me, to be pretty as potentially despicable from the point of view of accidentally entangling birds as they attempt to fly into a hedge, which is basically a home and/or shopping mall to many species. The type of net used would have a big influence on the potential for, and level of, entanglement. I have only ever seen hessian and flax type nets used, which would probably rarely catch birds, but I could imagine a dodgy builder or developer using cheap thin nylon netting which would cause carnage.
|
|
|
Post by ChrisB on Mar 31, 2019 11:47:39 GMT
MikeMusic Mike, the tree felling regulations are currently under review, mostly in order to stop local authorities felling street trees without consultation (a la Sheffield City Council) but also because people are able to circumvent the law through several exemptions, which when written, probably seemed reasonable. The Forestry Commission enforce the legislation, but even if the law has been broken, if a developer wants to try it, they usually get away with it. If they do, by some miraculous alignment of the planets, get caught and prosecuted, the fines are so minimal as to be irrelevant in relation to the potential gains from breaking the law. And again, the mitigation required for felling trees legitimately under planning law is usually a joke, unenforced and not maintained. Thank the Tories for cutting funding to public bodies.
|
|