Jump to content

Lockdown ? What Lockdown?


Momac

Featured Posts

23 minutes ago, peterboat said:

I think that the government would like slum landlords out of business or so it seems with these additional costs 

I'm sure it would, along with most other people. That's if a 'slum' landlord refers to his or her attitude towards his or her responsibilities, rather than the area that he or she rents in. Most landlords maintain their houses and are fair towards their tenants, regardless of where the house is.

 

Can you imagine the uproar if owner occupied houses had forced gas safety checks every year, electrical tests every 5 years, non compliance was a criminal offense? Gas is gas and electric is electric, the risks associated with these forms of energy are identical, regardless of who owns a house. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, mrsmelly said:

They are now much cheaper than they used to be, I am guessing this is due to the online firms of late? In all honesty I dont know how they make it pay today, unlike years ago. 1 percent is what one has quoted me and 1 and a quarter percent the one I am going with. That means they have to come out and foto and do leaflets and a website and deal with eejuts on the fone and in person for 2 grand. They are welcome to it, I just wish they were not so slippery in dealing with, its like talking with Uriah Heep.

Especially when you mention Brexit

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, The Welsh Cruiser said:

I'm sure it would, along with most other people. That's if a 'slum' landlord refers to his or her attitude towards his or her responsibilities, rather than the area that he or she rents in. Most landlords maintain their houses and are fair towards their tenants, regardless of where the house is.

 

Can you imagine the uproar if owner occupied houses had forced gas safety checks every year, electrical tests every 5 years, non compliance was a criminal offense? Gas is gas and electric is electric, the risks associated with these forms of energy are identical, regardless of who owns a house. 

I dont want to muddy the waters but in London its largely the Immigrant Community taking advantage of the Immigrant Community so I dont expect its high up Saddiques Agenda , I mention this largely because of Grenfell which was absolutely riddled with Illegal Subletting , forced safety checks if they occurred were completely useless

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, peterboat said:

I think that the government would like slum landlords out of business or so it seems with these additional costs 

I dont think they do Peter , more likely what they want is to levy additional taxes either direct or indirect and the young couple who let out Grannies old flat around the corner are the easy targets . Aslam down the local Kebab shop with a couple of workers living upstairs they wont be interested in and thats how this Country is run nowadays , they always choose the easy target and nine times out of ten that target will be the law abiding one

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Parahandy said:

 thats how this Country is run nowadays , they always choose the easy target and nine times out of ten that target will be the law abiding one

This is always the case. If you are in the system, then you are easily traceable. If you operate in the 'black' economy, you can get away with a lot. The penalties for faulty gas or electrical work appear to be much more severe for a registered technician than for a chancer who is unlucky enough to get caught. Looking closer to home, if you don't licence your boat, or if you overstay, you are soon chased if you have an address and live there. If you are an unlicensed 'nomad', it is a long time before you eventually get brought to book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Loddon said:

I have been out watering today, 6 of our 7 water butts are just about empty. It will be hosepipe next week :(

 

its climate change don't you know

How about "glass [if not water butt] half full"? Most of April so far has been gorgeous, at a time when many people aren't going out to work can enjoy it, whether in their garden, walking through a park or whatever.

   Our garden is well advanced, several rose bushes have buds, and indeed the one which produces big blood-red blooms looks likely to do so in the next few days. The garden is currently dry, but going out in the brilliant sunshine to water it is not a hardship. If it had tiddled it down with rain all month, far more people would be disgruntled!

 

This reminds me, I must go out and water the vegetable patch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Ex Brummie said:

This is always the case. If you are in the system, then you are easily traceable. If you operate in the 'black' economy, you can get away with a lot. The penalties for faulty gas or electrical work appear to be much more severe for a registered technician than for a chancer who is unlucky enough to get caught. Looking closer to home, if you don't licence your boat, or if you overstay, you are soon chased if you have an address and live there. If you are an unlicensed 'nomad', it is a long time before you eventually get brought to book.

You seem to be saying that because some people believe they can (and do) live outside the law then we all should be allowed to do so.

 

Neither an anarchist nor a fascist be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mike Todd said:

You seem to be saying that because some people believe they can (and do) live outside the law then we all should be allowed to do so.

 

Neither an anarchist nor a fascist be.

Absolutely fail to understand you Mike , where did you deduce that ? All we are talking about is Officialdom and how it always seems to pick the easiest Targets when it comes to Revenue Raising and indeed Prosecuting the miscreant .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mike Todd said:

You seem to be saying that because some people believe they can (and do) live outside the law then we all should be allowed to do so.

 

Neither an anarchist nor a fascist be.

That seems like a bit of a stretch?? I didn't think that was what he was saying, merely just stating a "fact".

 

There is no doubt that some people dont believe that the law applies to them, and they continue to get away with it.

 

For the record, I dont want to be one of those people, and I dont think that was the point of the post you responded to... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, The Welsh Cruiser said:

Is it more dangerous to have a dodgy gas or electrical installation in a rented house rather than an owner occupied one?

 

The owner occupier can take responsibility for her own safety in her home. The renter has to depend on somebody else. and as we all know, that somebody else might not care quite as much if the safety measures hit him in the pocket.

 

Also, you can't sue yourself, but you can sue a landlord.

5 hours ago, Parahandy said:

Aslam down the local Kebab shop with a couple of workers living upstairs they wont be interested in and thats how this Country is run nowadays , they always choose the easy target and nine times out of ten that target will be the law abiding one

 

They? They? Now who is choosing the easy target?

  • Greenie 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Machpoint005 said:

 

Perhaps, just perhaps, "easy" targets are the ones against which the proecutions succeed? That may be why they seem easy with hindsight!

That lay behind my previous response. If that is the case, then the complaint is without any possibility of remedy other than by the supposition I put forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Machpoint005 said:

 

Perhaps, just perhaps, "easy" targets are the ones against which the proecutions succeed? That may be why they seem easy with hindsight!

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/cars/article-7361213/UK-authorities-chase-foreign-drivers-offences-committed-roads.html

 

Not really , Prosecutions can fail for any number of reasons especially when the miscreant is of Foreign Origin , here is an example this time concerning Driving Offences . I know for a fact that the Safer Roads Team in Northamptonshire ignore Speeding and Red Light Offences , they take the view that nine times out of ten they are unenforceable and not worth the bother , did you know this ?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Machpoint005 said:

 

SFW?

 

 

They ignore them because the Englishman is an easier target than Johnny Foreigner , the system like I suggested earlier is geared that way . Unlike your assertion , hindsight has no part in this deduction .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Mike Todd said:

You seem to be saying that because some people believe they can (and do) live outside the law then we all should be allowed to do so.

 

Neither an anarchist nor a fascist be.

Neither I, nor most other respondents apparently, can see how you deduce this from my post. I am neither a fascist or an anarchist, and have no wish to live in a lawless society, although I do despair at some of the indifference exhibited by the authorities. The thin end of the wedge gets fatter. I am of an age that can remember when people did not leave litter, and plain walls were left plain. Society no longer bats an eyelid at transgressions of these old values, and living on credit can never be reasonable. It only takes a situation like this, or the Bank crash of 2008 and the bottom falls out of everybody's world except for the leeches who look to capitalise on the vulnerable, or those who basically are anarchists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ex Brummie said:

Neither I, nor most other respondents apparently, can see how you deduce this from my post. I am neither a fascist or an anarchist, and have no wish to live in a lawless society, although I do despair at some of the indifference exhibited by the authorities. The thin end of the wedge gets fatter. I am of an age that can remember when people did not leave litter, and plain walls were left plain. Society no longer bats an eyelid at transgressions of these old values, and living on credit can never be reasonable. It only takes a situation like this, or the Bank crash of 2008 and the bottom falls out of everybody's world except for the leeches who look to capitalise on the vulnerable, or those who basically are anarchists.

I would be very happy if nobody left litter and there was no graffiti; I'm not so sure that I would want to pay taxes to ensure that this was enforced thoroughly though.

 

Anarchists have a long and interesting history, they are not all "bad people" - remember the lyric - "to live outside the law you must be honest" - there is a lot of truth in that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, frahkn said:

I would be very happy if nobody left litter and there was no graffiti; I'm not so sure that I would want to pay taxes to ensure that this was enforced thoroughly though.

 

 

I hate litter-bugs and graffiti scum, however their activities are not  the issue.  The issue is that their activities are merely a symptom of a creeping breakdown in the standards we (well I at least) were brought up to believe were important.  As a reactionary crusty old git I consider this represents a failing society and I would not want to be around for another 70 years to see us becoming a 'new third world country'.

I have lived in Singapore where standards are high and the population doesn't need much encouragement to keep them that way. 

I have lived in India and despair of them ever becoming civilised.

I have lived in Turkey and was surprised to observe just how well they are doing in these areas - maybe they were always respectful and civilised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Murflynn said:

I hate litter-bugs and graffiti scum, however their activities are not  the issue.  The issue is that their activities are merely a symptom of a creeping breakdown in the standards we (well I at least) were brought up to believe were important.  As a reactionary crusty old git I consider this represents a failing society and I would not want to be around for another 70 years to see us becoming a 'new third world country'.

I have lived in Singapore where standards are high and the population doesn't need much encouragement to keep them that way. 

I have lived in India and despair of them ever becoming civilised.

I have lived in Turkey and was surprised to observe just how well they are doing in these areas - maybe they were always respectful and civilised.

Today's standards of behaviour are not those with which I was brought up. I think they are inferior but I am open to the possibility that I might be wrong. I bow to no-one in the "crusty old git" stakes but I'll have to give you "reactionary". I have been to Singapore and would not want to live there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Ex Brummie said:

Neither I, nor most other respondents apparently, can see how you deduce this from my post. I am neither a fascist or an anarchist, and have no wish to live in a lawless society, although I do despair at some of the indifference exhibited by the authorities. The thin end of the wedge gets fatter. I am of an age that can remember when people did not leave litter, and plain walls were left plain. Society no longer bats an eyelid at transgressions of these old values, and living on credit can never be reasonable. It only takes a situation like this, or the Bank crash of 2008 and the bottom falls out of everybody's world except for the leeches who look to capitalise on the vulnerable, or those who basically are anarchists.

For the record, if you read my post carefully, I did not accuse anyone personally of being either an anarchist or a fascist - it would be hard to be both anyway!

 

My warning, however, was that if you promote the view that because some people break the law and get away with it then that is justification for all of us to do so. Take a look at Brazil(Bolsanaro) to see right now how such thinking can lead to either extreme, often in increasing reaction to the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Parahandy said:

They ignore them because the Englishman is an easier target than Johnny Foreigner , the system like I suggested earlier is geared that way . Unlike your assertion , hindsight has no part in this deduction .

The word "target" is the clue. Set targets, and beware of unintended consequences. The Windrush episode was the result of setting targets for deportations: the easiest ones were the ones who were law abiding, and had left a paper trail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Iain_S said:

The word "target" is the clue. Set targets, and beware of unintended consequences. The Windrush episode was the result of setting targets for deportations: the easiest ones were the ones who were law abiding, and had left a paper trail.

Government Targets are simply Political Suicide , constantly when listening to Politicians quote them  , I think to myself why did you say that ?

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.