Why are they allowed to block Cycle Route 1 and the Thames Path?

On 17/01/2012 06:58, Beretie Wooster wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 22:09:31 +0000, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:

On 16/01/2012 21:11, Beretie Wooster wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 17:54:28 +0000, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:

On 16/01/2012 17:01, Beretie Wooster wrote:


The system worked perfectly well until summer 2005 when the boiler
packed up and needed repalcing. By this time I was not so keen on
spending my time doing the work myself, so paid someone to do it for
me. I certainly wouldn't trust that sort of job to a handyman.

Quite right. He would have to be Gas Safe registered to do that. Which
would make him a plumber, not a handyman.

But I wouldn't expect you to know that.

How do you 'repalce' a boiler BTW?

You replace the 'a' fro an 'l' and replace an 'l' fro an 'a' then you
have replace not repalce.

'fro'?

Ha ha!

Are you really a teacher?

Woosh!

Desperation enters stage left......

--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton - Lancaster
University

On 17/01/2012 07:06, Simon Mason wrote:
On Jan 17, 6:59 am, Beretie wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 21:36:20 -0800 (PST), Simon Mason





wrote:
On Jan 16, 9:11 pm, Beretie wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 17:54:28 +0000, Dave - Cyclists VOR

wrote:
On 16/01/2012 17:01, Beretie Wooster wrote:

The system worked perfectly well until summer 2005 when the boiler
packed up and needed repalcing. By this time I was not so keen on
spending my time doing the work myself, so paid someone to do it for
me. I certainly wouldn't trust that sort of job to a handyman.

Quite right. He would have to be Gas Safe registered to do that. Which
would make him a plumber, not a handyman.

But I wouldn't expect you to know that.

How do you 'repalce' a boiler BTW?

You replace the 'a' fro an 'l' and replace an 'l' fro an 'a' then you
have replace not repalce.

Don't be too harsh on the muppet, he only has to follow pictures on
Ikea instruction sheets.

Dave has already admitted that he is incapable of reading Ikea
pictures.



Words don't come easy as FR Davic once sang.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

FR David of course :-)
I changed him from a Tunisian to a Serb.

'Words don't come easy' then he ****s up the spelling of 'David'.




--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton - Lancaster
University

On 17/01/2012 06:57, Beretie Wooster wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 22:07:52 +0000, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:

On 16/01/2012 21:08, Beretie Wooster wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 19:04:50 +0000, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:

On 16/01/2012 18:07, Beretie Wooster wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jan 2012 19:22:08 +0000, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:

We manage quite well thanks. We know what teachers earn, its public
domain, so we have a little chuckle at that. And of course, not being
wage slaves, we employ clever accountants to make sure we pay almost no
tax. All quite legal.

OK, Bodge job. How much tax will your clever accountant save you in
the year 2011/2012?

Here are my full year accounts:
UK Income: £59,202
Made up of: £46,002 salary; £13,200 rental income
Less pension: £6,900
Less mortage interest: £5,713
Less property maintenance: £4,115
Taxable income: £42,474
Threshold for higher rate tax: £42, 475

Tax saved: £6,690
Plus a £75 saving for not having to employ a "clever accountant" 'cos
I am numerate enough to work these little things out for myself.

Numeracy is only a small part of being a clever accountant Cwispin.


Yes - I am sure that your accountant is clever. Charging you £62.50 +
VAT for you to save £74 in tax. I bet you think you are being clever
by hiring your clever accountant.

Oh I do. I won't pay any tax at all next year. All perfectly legal.

I am very happy for you.

Just out of interest, how have you managed to wangle your van to be
vehicle excise duty exempt, and how has your clever accountant managed
to VAT exempt you for your chocolate biscuits?

Alright, income tax.

I see. Your clever accountant isn't that clever after all.

There are more straws you can clutch at I'm sure. Your post is clearly
about income tax.

****ed up again, now wriggling.

Just like you wriggled about commuter challenges, inventing railway
stations in medieval castles.

Happy now **** for brains?

I have always been happy.

The feeble minded often are.


--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton - Lancaster
University

On 15/01/2012 20:30, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 18:11:03 +0000, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:

On 13/01/2012 22:50, Judith wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jan 2012 07:16:47 +0000, Bertie wrote:

On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 14:07:36 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

On Jan 12, 10:10 pm, Bertie wrote:
.

Are you not going abroad this year at all?

We're close to skint, having spent something in the region of £130,000
on our house refurbishment.

Sheesh and I am balking at a £2000 bathroom.

Our bathroom tiles came to £700; taps £390 shower, £190 sink, £416
bath; £477 washstand; £392 cabinet; £176 mirror; £105 pan, £64
cistern; £450 wet room shower screen. To save costs, we kept the
original claw foot 1930s bath and had it re-enameled for £550.


I wonder why so many of the psycholists here have to tell us how much they have spent on this thing or that thing.

I think it must be some sort of insecurity.

Must be some kind of stupidity to pay those prices.

I expect he turned up on his bike, then told them he was a teacher.
Guaranteed to be stitched up.

I had discounts of up to 70% off the Roper Rhodes list price.


Yes dear, of course you did.

The price lists they use to stitch up the green as grass.

I get 40% off list price from several suppliers. They bump the real
prices up to allow for it.



--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton - Lancaster
University

On Tue, 17 Jan 2012 08:59:45 +0000, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:

On 17/01/2012 06:57, Beretie Wooster wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 22:07:52 +0000, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:

On 16/01/2012 21:08, Beretie Wooster wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 19:04:50 +0000, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:

On 16/01/2012 18:07, Beretie Wooster wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jan 2012 19:22:08 +0000, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:

We manage quite well thanks. We know what teachers earn, its public
domain, so we have a little chuckle at that. And of course, not being
wage slaves, we employ clever accountants to make sure we pay almost no
tax. All quite legal.

OK, Bodge job. How much tax will your clever accountant save you in
the year 2011/2012?

Here are my full year accounts:
UK Income: £59,202
Made up of: £46,002 salary; £13,200 rental income
Less pension: £6,900
Less mortage interest: £5,713
Less property maintenance: £4,115
Taxable income: £42,474
Threshold for higher rate tax: £42, 475

Tax saved: £6,690
Plus a £75 saving for not having to employ a "clever accountant" 'cos
I am numerate enough to work these little things out for myself.

Numeracy is only a small part of being a clever accountant Cwispin.


Yes - I am sure that your accountant is clever. Charging you £62.50 +
VAT for you to save £74 in tax. I bet you think you are being clever
by hiring your clever accountant.

Oh I do. I won't pay any tax at all next year. All perfectly legal.

I am very happy for you.

Just out of interest, how have you managed to wangle your van to be
vehicle excise duty exempt, and how has your clever accountant managed
to VAT exempt you for your chocolate biscuits?

Alright, income tax.

I see. Your clever accountant isn't that clever after all.

There are more straws you can clutch at I'm sure. Your post is clearly
about income tax.

****ed up again, now wriggling.

Just like you wriggled about commuter challenges, inventing railway
stations in medieval castles.

Happy now **** for brains?

I have always been happy.

The feeble minded often are.


Indeed - look at Mason and Chapman - happy as a pigs in the ****.

What an appropriate analogy.

On Jan 17, 6:59*am, Beretie Wooster wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 21:36:20 -0800 (PST), Simon Mason





wrote:
On Jan 16, 9:11*pm, Beretie Wooster wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 17:54:28 +0000, Dave - Cyclists VOR

wrote:
On 16/01/2012 17:01, Beretie Wooster wrote:

The system worked perfectly well until summer 2005 when the boiler
packed up and needed repalcing. By this time I was not so keen on
spending my time doing the work myself, so paid someone to do it for
me. I certainly wouldn't trust that sort of job to a handyman.

Quite right. *He would have to be Gas Safe registered to do that. *Which
would make him a plumber, not a handyman.

But I wouldn't expect you to know that.

How do you 'repalce' a boiler BTW?

You replace the 'a' fro an 'l' and replace an 'l' fro an 'a' then you
have replace not repalce.

Don't be too harsh on the muppet, he only has to follow pictures on
Ikea instruction sheets.

Dave has already admitted that he is incapable of reading Ikea
pictures.



Words don't come easy as FR Davic once sang.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Poor baby.
--

Simon Mason

On Tue, 17 Jan 2012 09:05:06 +0000, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:

On 15/01/2012 20:30, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 18:11:03 +0000, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:

On 13/01/2012 22:50, Judith wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jan 2012 07:16:47 +0000, Bertie wrote:

On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 14:07:36 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

On Jan 12, 10:10 pm, Bertie wrote:
.

Are you not going abroad this year at all?

We're close to skint, having spent something in the region of £130,000
on our house refurbishment.

Sheesh and I am balking at a £2000 bathroom.

Our bathroom tiles came to £700; taps £390 shower, £190 sink, £416
bath; £477 washstand; £392 cabinet; £176 mirror; £105 pan, £64
cistern; £450 wet room shower screen. To save costs, we kept the
original claw foot 1930s bath and had it re-enameled for £550.


I wonder why so many of the psycholists here have to tell us how much they have spent on this thing or that thing.

I think it must be some sort of insecurity.

Must be some kind of stupidity to pay those prices.

I expect he turned up on his bike, then told them he was a teacher.
Guaranteed to be stitched up.

I had discounts of up to 70% off the Roper Rhodes list price.


Yes dear, of course you did.

The price lists they use to stitch up the green as grass.

I get 40% off list price from several suppliers. They bump the real
prices up to allow for it.

Perhaps you'd be good enough to point out where Roper Rhodes sell
direct.
http://www.roperrhodes.co.uk/

I have the Karma 900 washstand, 900 mirror and the 300 floor cupboard.
http://www.hq180.com/_mockups/waters...2011/05/41.jpg

On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 22:07:52 +0000, Dave - Cyclists VOR wrote:



**** for brains?


The issue is whether the hagfish is itself a degenerate type of
vertebrate-fish (most closely related to lampreys), or else may represent
a stage which precedes the evolution of the vertebral column (as do
lancelets).


--
An oft-repeated lie is still a lie.

On Tue, 17 Jan 2012 08:59:45 +0000, Dave - Cyclists VOR wrote:



feeble minded


The original scheme groups hagfish and lampreys together as cyclostomes
(or historically, Agnatha), as the oldest surviving clade of vertebrates
alongside gnathostomes (the now-ubiquitous jawed-vertebrates).


--
An oft-repeated lie is still a lie.

On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 22:35:31 +0000, Judith wrote:



a ******.


An alternative scheme proposed that jawed-vertebrates are more closely
related to lampreys than to hagfish (i..e, that vertebrates include
lampreys but exclude hagfish), and introduces the category craniata to
group vertebrates near hagfish. Recent DNA evidence has supported the
original scheme.


--


snip

--
An oft-repeated lie is still a lie.