ECCOnoob

Trolls like you generally do have higher post counts. You know full well it was a temporary attraction. You know full well that kids (i.e the majority of its footfall and money making) have now gone back to school as its the end of the summer holidays. Everyone is returning back to work and getting ready for what will be shortly the autumn weather coming in. Even your tiny pea brain should also have an inkling that Meadowhall will require time to dismantle and remove the attraction in order to get their land back to being a car park in time for the incoming Christmas shopping season - which in the world of retail will be starting to rear its head as early as next month. This will have been all set out in stone months or even years in advance. They all have strict timetables and follow fixed operational processes. They're not just picking and choosing on some whin. Even the previous "unplanned" closure due to the severe weather, would be documented somewhere in a risk assessment or operational contingency analysis. Just another one of your tedious attention seeking posts - like a few others on this forum. I'd like to think that our species cannot really be so dumb on how the world works, as people try to make themselves out.

I am. So maybe pull your head out of your backside and take note of the sensible comment given by the other poster. In principle, removal of carpet is a trivial decorative feature which has no impact on the structural elements of the building, nor exterior and therefore a freeholder usually wouldn't have rights dictate on the floor surface any more than they would type of wallpaper. However, as sensibly pointed out, it is not so simple and it may vary wildly depending on these nature of the building, any specific clauses in the freehold wording, type of material being used and that's before we get onto the further complications of whether the tenant below has a genuine ground for a noise nuisance complaint which then has its own completely separate rules and boundaries. THAT is why you will need a suitable lawyer and pay for their specialist advice to go through this stuff and give you the complete picture with full context - There is no simple yes or no people can give you, even less without any idea as to what circumstances they are looking at.

Blimey that business diploma included a term on criminal law too did it..... You really are the fountain of all knowledge or a sewage pipe full of excrement. - Think I will let the wider audience decide that

Couldn't agree more. I've given up trying to have any recent debate with AnnaB because her opinions have become so ridiculously unrealistic. So extreme. So loaded with bias towards some anti-tory, anti-Capitalist, 'corporations are all evil' slant it's not worth the effort. Anyone living in this country with our health system, our welfare, our standard of living even for the poorest in society - throwing out such a ridiculous comparator - wouldn't recognise genuine third world conditions even if it came up and smacked them in the face.

Bit behind the times Irene. 10 years ago there was big publicity and discussion about re-categorisation of social class. Following a wide survey conducted between various academics 7 categories were formed, well beyond the stereotype three. These new classes don't even have that much focus on income levels anymore. It's more about job roles, social outlook and cultural tastes. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/apr/03/great-british-class-survey-seven https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2303333/Great-British-Class-Survey-reveals-UK-7-social-classes-Are-precariat-new-affluent-worker-elite.html https://www.itv.com/news/story/2013-04-03/new-survey-finds-uk-seven-social-classes/ I very much seem to be 'technical middle class' learning towards 'elite'

Yeah, good luck with that next time you walk around a major international airport. Just pick any random door you want to wander around completely freely. After all you're a free agent....right? Let's see how far you'll get before the police put you in cuffs. Go on. Do it, do it, do it.....I could do with a laugh.

Possibly. However, more like resourcing and monetary implications,will be the more legitimate reason. Airport operations especially at major hubs like Heathrow are always down to the absolute second. Any slight disruption, changes to staffing or adjustments on terminal operations could cost thousands of pounds. The fact there may be little darling children or people who travel hundreds of miles to get a glimpse of their footballing stars, is irrelevant. They were not asked to go there. They were not invited to be there. There was no arrangement for them. It's all good with the throw away comment that the airport should have done a "nice gesture" but that will be a business and operational decision for them to make and may not be possible at such short notice with no advance planning. Even lesser when I see in the papers we are talking about merely 40 entitled cry babies who seem to want the airport to drop everything and pander to their needs when they've already got well over 100,000 actual passengers to deal with in a day. If the 40 uninvited fans wanted this so much why didn't they make a gesture themselves by reaching out to the airport or authorities and do a bit of planning to try and get something more official and organised set up.

Maybe they didn't know. They were thousands of feet up in the sky. I'm annoyed by the amount of negative press going off. They are not some commodity that the public can demand to gape at, prod, hug, grab any time they want. There was no official arrangement for any sort of meet and greet or fan zone or welcoming committee. Yes, the airport authorities possibly could have handled it better, but ultimately they have a job to do in processing passengers - with the arrival element of that being get the passengers through and out as fast as possible. Besides, I certainly don't look and feel my best after a long haul flight so the last thing I'd want to do is be forced into some impromptu public parade. For the fans choosing to rock up uninvited and hover around the doorsteps and waiting areas and stage doors - that's the gamble you take. Sometimes you are lucky and your star will stop, sign autographs and talk. Other times you are unlucky and your star might never come out that door or might be whisked away to a prior engagement or in some cases simply might not be in the mood to stop and talk that day. That's their choice.

I don't think that's quite right. From the sentencing I've read she was found guilty of actual murder of seven children. The 'doubts' arose with regards to seven other completely different attempted murders, two of which she was found not guilty and the other five were ones were no verdict could be reached. Whichever way you spin the numbers, she was still found guilty in conducting seven out of 14 possible murders. Is the conviction absolutely cast iron solid with absolutely no areas of doubt? No of course not. No conviction is. But let's get real here. This has not been done on a whim. Hospital and police investigation, review and analysis by the crown prosecution service to bring a prosecution, 10 month long trial and over four weeks of jury deliberations have reached this decision. You can't seriously be trying to argue this as bad management or lack of supervision with her being the poor overworked employee victim not aware what she was doing. Actually the collective 'we' does. It was a hearing with a public gallery and media presence with every word being recorded and transcribed. Any of us could have been sat up there observing the whole proceedings. There is a whole section of transcript out there with quotations directly from the barristers and the parties. Some publications were even doing live feed timelines. There were recorded podcasts of trial proceedings and even live video links from the courtroom for people to observe. Yes of course, most of the men and women in the street, simply get the condensed version from the newspapers who have stories to print an angles to achieve. But like most things in life, you consider a range of sources. One fact checks things.

As I said, if you bothered to read beyond my first line, you are deluded if you don't think there was just as much, if not more, paperwork and administrative burden back in those days too. It was just done very differently and a hell of a lot slower. They might have had very different job titles but there were just as many pen pushers back then So don't be thinking that getting rid of the suits and replacing with the scrubs is some magic wand solution to make everything better.

I don't know why people think it was sooo good back in the black and white days either. Just because they didn't have computers or email didn't automatically mean more face to face discussions. Doctors and Consultants used to dictate their memos and briefings and charts and notes off to their secretaries or huge typing pools to then be transcribed and sent back to be checked and amended by the author who sent it back secretary to retype it then send back to the author to sign off then passed onto a messenger who delivered it five doors down the corridor to the recipient whose own secretary would eventually open it and leave it waiting in file for the recipient to review once they got back to their desk then said recipient would prepare a response by dictating to their secretary.... round and round the process went again. Let's not pretend even back in the days of sternly matrons running their departments with an iron fist there were not some just as huge scandals and mistakes and cover-ups throughout the 60s, 70s and 80s. I am not saying that the management in this present case aren't guilty of something and that will no doubt come out in all the investigations and enquiries. But lets not also forget the circumstances we are dealing with here. The culprit is a nurse - thus in their profession patients die. It is part of the course. Distressing as it is, in a large hospital environment, a death in itself would not be some instant red flag of murder. Even with a pattern of death emerging, there are many stages beforehand which would need to be considered before anyone would jump to red flags of criminal intent by the clinician or nurse or doctor. A process made even more difficult for management if, as appears to have happened in this case, they said culprit has been manipulating and falsifying the records. There could be very legitimate reasons why management wouldn't be jumping in with heavy allegations like murder against their employee. One obvious one is that the unions would be screaming the house down if they did. We have already seen what happens if a hospital management try to bring in some extra layer of compliance checks or start to get a bit more heavy-handed with their checking and monitoring of what those precious doctors and nurses are doing. How many times do we see on here. Hot air being blown about silly health and safety rules or overbearing form filling or whines about doctors and nursing spending too much time jumping through compliance hoops when they should be getting on with the job or overbearing management interfering..... People often throw out the line, there should be more clinical stuff and less pen pushers but according to the study by the Kings Fund, management staff numbers are actually in decline whereas nursing staff are reportedly increased by 23% in the past 10 years. Its really not as simple as people think. Everyone always defaults to blaming management and the fat cats in the suits, but the fact is this nurse has been through an entire court process and found guilty by a jury of her peers. This was not some manipulated internal enquiry with bias and management cover up. This was a court of law where all evidence has been heard and an independent decision made that she was guilty of her crimes. Management incompetence may well be a partial factor in what happened, but this nurse wasn't Florence Nightingale having a bad day or suffering from overworking by her slave driving management. She was a conscious murderer and now convicted criminal.

Whoopi-Doo. I will remember that next time I don't go to that restaurant. Even you can't be that dense to realise that I was talking generally. Who wants to be carrying a couple of hundred pounds in their back pocket when one has a nice convenient plastic card which is extremely secure and can be stopped immediately if someone knicks it. If that's the best selling point your 'keep cash' little private group can offer, it sounds more like a cult than campaign.

I suspect very little given I have just had a quick check on their website and Friday. Saturday is pretty much booked up for the next 5 weeks. Maybe they have a special table just for Irene in the back kitchen or something.

Exactly. This being a tiny restaurant which has a 3-month advance booking system, very limited opening hours, a stand by cancellation waiting list and very strict rules on how long people can stay at their tables. But of course Ms Irene just wanders in any time she likes and gets a table. Not forgetting of course to go queue up in the bank beforehand to make sure she has enough pennies in her purse to make that precious cash payment..... Hmmmm. Rather than walking in, I'd rather walk on by and go find one of the many other restaurants that actually do accept card payments. When I go out for the evening I don't want to be faffing about worrying whether I'm going to have enough cash to pay for that spontaneous extra bottle of wine or another round of drinks or a second dessert.

I'm not talking about a handful of local examples im talking about wider wholesale changes in society. The way that the world has always progressed and we have to progress with it. Yes well done, you have found some establishments that don't take card, but out of how many other restaurants and fish bars that take debit cards or are connected to one of the many food app services. Yes, for some stupid reason the majority of our hackney cabs still are cash only - but that is clearly why they are getting their ass kicked by the mini cab services and Uber who do offer card-based payments. Plus it is a dwindling minority anyway, given that many local authorities are insisting that their licence hackney carriage drivers do provide facility for card payments 56 years ago it was implausible to think of getting cash by any means other than queueing up in a bank and making sure you are there Monday to Friday 9to5, otherwise you out of luck. Then came along Barclays with its launch of the first cash machine and the revolution happened. I didn't see many groups of morons protesting about those new fangled cash points and demanding their rights to be restricted to only getting cash from the bank counter during standard office hours.

Yeah and I reckon that many others completely disagree with you. Take a look around at what is happening. Look at some of these independent food courts that are springing up all over the place, it's filled with businesses that are either card only or heavily take their income from card transactions. Go to a county show, farmers market, Christmas market - see how many traders have got card machines set up and ready to go. Pubs and restaurants up and down the land are leaning towards card payments. Little independent cafes, hair salons, barbers, nail bars, take- aways, even my village's tiny sandwich bar has got card machines. Buses accept card payments, taxis accept card payments, charity collectors accept card payments. Even some buskers have now got card machines. My window cleaner, my decorator and the last plumber I used were all happily paid by bank transfer. Most of my input to work collections for gifts to colleagues are sent round as links to make online payment transfer. For several years now gifts to relatives outside my immediate household have been prepaid debit cards or gift cards for a certain retailer because they are much easier and safer than cash to send out and can be cancelled if they go missing. For businesses, no more worrying about transporting and storing and securing and depositing cash. No more faffing about having to balance change and keep floats. No more time wasted back and forth to a bank.... Those independent traders can run their point of sale on little more than a mobile phone and a £39 a card machine. That's a damn sight cheaper than most cash registers and comes with the added bonus of doing half the bookkeeping job for you. Your group sounds like an echo chamber to me. You keep fighting that fight with your fellow luddites, deludedly battling against a form of payment which has been in existence since the early 70s and mainstream for nearly 40 years. The rest of us are moving on with the world.

Is there any compulsion on a defendant to respond to the claim online? I am not 100% familiar with the MCOL system as it's not my field but I thought the Civil Procedure Rules allowed a defendant to prepare a response by way of paper, in which case the court would simply send it on to you. Now if the matter is more the defendant has failed to respond either by acknowledging or filing a defence within the permitted time frames - then that is the trigger for your application for judgment probably more over any dispute over how they filed their documents. However, you should keep in mind that a defendant still may have an opportunity to apply to set aside your judgment, if they can persuade the court they had legitimate reasons for their failure to meet deadline such as arguments that they were not served with the papers properly or the claim was incorrectly issued or the pleaded parties are incorrect or outside jurisdiction or even pleading a simple administrative slip. Assuming that you are without legal representation, you might want to check with the court as to what the specific procedure is and what forms you might need. Whilst they can't give legal advice, the court clerks can at least help you with procedure. Pretty rare these days. Given lots of solicitors are working on fixed fees, low value protocols and non win-no fee agreements, the days of the old 'half hour free advice' are long gone for the majority of firms.

Well Gerald Ratner, maybe you shouldn't be running a business if you are the kind of person who thinks receiving a text message and entering a code to protect their online accounts, is too much effort. Poor you. Oh, the humanity. It really must be such a burden just having to put a key in the door to open and lock up your shop twice a day everyday. Oh God how relentless..... Your bank has a duty of care to protect their customers from the blindingly obvious shifting trend from physical thefts to cybercrime. If it's all sooo inconvenient, why didn't you choose one of the multiple other options to pay your VAT bill. I bet you'd be the first to be kicking off at said bank if anything did happen to your money online..

All seem like perfectly valid reasons to me, but we all know you're an obtuse clown so will always find some pathetic reason to argue against. If you are personally not engaging in the activity and passing responsibility for your child to whatever swimming instructor/coach sessions the venue/school provides, then no, you shouldn't be coaching them. If there is already an authorised (and frankly far more qualified ) instructor in charge of the activity it's damn right they don't want pushy entitlement syndrome parents barking orders at their child through an earpiece. They didn't say that no-one is allowed poolside. They said YOU shouldn't be poolside which again, is perfectly reasonable if you are not taking part in the activity. The venue has responsibilities for people using the pool. They have hygiene and safety responsibilities to keep. They need to control the environment . You have no reason to be there and no right to under their rules. Same with the electronics. The venue's equipment and radios will be checked and risk assessed and authorised for use in that environment. Your gadget wasn't. Why on earth would you think you have some right to start using it without permission. Why not buy your own private pool and teach your child in your own space. You can manage it exactly the way you want, coach him exactly the way you want and even chuck a whole stereo system in the pool if you want to. As I said before, until such time as it happens, Get over yourself. Their venue. Their rules. How would you react if someone walked into your shop with no intention of buying any products then wanders behind the counter or in the back room without reason or your authorisation, starts interfering and engaging with your customers and suddenly plugging a device into your power sockets or fiddling with your equipment without permission...

Well I'd be saying good riddance to parents like that. The arrogance that they expect their offspring to choose and live by the sexuality that they determine is best. I'd just want my children to be happy and successful in their own lives and wouldn't give a flying fig on their sexuality or whether they choose to have children or not. Jesus Christ, no wonder even in 2023 large numbers of people are still living in denial or falsehood or having their freedoms curtailed for constant pressure to conform to some bull crap pre-determined moral or social acceptance for fear of reprisal, family breakdown, being outcast or even been persecuted (70 countries) or killed (11 countries) by a government authority. People are asking if the pride marches are still relevant? The answer is bloody obvious.

That may be true, but let's face it, the public will complain no matter what a local authority does. When the Manchester christmas markets happened which were a far bigger and more prestigious scale than Sheffield, there was lots of complaints in the local rag about everything being 'tat' or a complete 'rip off'. Even the huge Winter Wonderland in London's Hyde Park was followed by a load of TripAdvisor reviews and keyboard whiners about its cost, being too crowded, being just a tourist trap, profiteering etc. However, as we all know how fickle "the public" can be, if the Authorities didn't run these activities the same keyboard whiners would be banging on about how the city never does anything or is always behind its rivals or is just a dead space....

I am not talking about Pounds Park. I am talking about the seating and planting which is directly outside Grosvenor House. There is no children's playground in it. Neither is there one in any of the other locations I listed. There are range of options in the city centre which you could have chosen.

Since when? Devonshire Green is within the S1 postcode, within the council city ward boundaries, and geographicly is located on the same parallels places like Atkinsons in one direction and the Beehive pub in other direction. You really are talking out your posterior again. Now if you were so perturbed by the children's funfair taking up your green space, why didn't you go and sit in the Pocket Park and planting outside Grosvenor House in Charter Square or Barkers Pool Gardens or inside the Winter Gardens or in Tudor Square or Fitzallan Square or Pounds Park or St George's Park.

Dependent on the circumstances it's probably going to be significantly more than that. His lawyers will be churning away all and everything they can find to show the extent and impacts on his life. What he could have achieved, What career is missed out on, what family and private life he is missed. It's a very long time since I did this sort of work. But precedent in case law even then gave amounts even for just 24 hours unlawful detention of a couple of thousand. I am not sure about the Birmingham six case mentioned above, but Im certainly aware of people receiving six figure settlements for just a few hundred days unlawful detention. As for the inflicted blood cases, that is likely to be far more nuanced as medical negligence is often hard to establish and there are lots of variables in the patients on whether they were actually affected by the contamination, whether they had a pre-existing symptoms or illness which would have caused the same issue in any event or, as often is the case and injury claims, whether they actually received the contaminated blood at all. You'd be surprised how many claimants, particularly in group actions, suddenly think they were part of it. Jump on the bandwagon and then months down the line it gets found out they weren't even affected or even part of the same hospital programme.

I don't understand your choice of emoji. In very hot climates around the world, you see that most people wear clothing which covers them up as much as possible. Dependant on the material, longer clothing can also be proven to keep people cooler. Given the extreme temperatures, some sort of face cover seems to be a perfectly reasonable and natural extension to that. To me, it's very much a white caucasian mentality to be stripping down to one's knickers and turning into a lobster the moment any sort of sun appears.