SPOILER ALERT - This week's spoiler from the DF

SPOILER ALERT - This week's spoiler from the DF
The bickering continues over who will win ownership of the Grange Farm
land that’s being offered up at auction. Meanwhile, Kate receives some
life-changing news and somebody makes a shocking return to Ambridge.
(So who returns - Rob? Matt? any other names?)

Matt would be good. I liked him. He was good with Peggy's husband
when he developed dementia.

Vicky <vicky.ayech@gmail.com> writes:

> SPOILER ALERT - This week's spoiler from the DF
>
> SPOILER ALERT - This week's spoiler from the DF
> The bickering continues over who will win ownership of the Grange Farm
> land that’s being offered up at auction. Meanwhile, Kate receives some
> life-changing news and somebody makes a shocking return to Ambridge.
> (So who returns - Rob? Matt? any other names?)
>
> Matt would be good. I liked him. He was good with Peggy's husband
> when he developed dementia.

He was a total arsehole who bullied elderly people out of his properties
in a Rachmanish way, to the point of killing them. No sympathy. Good
riddance to bad rubbish.

Rosie

On 02/12/2023 22:21, Rosie Mitchell wrote:
> Vicky <vicky.ayech@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> SPOILER ALERT - This week's spoiler from the DF
>>
>> SPOILER ALERT - This week's spoiler from the DF
>> The bickering continues over who will win ownership of the Grange Farm
>> land that’s being offered up at auction. Meanwhile, Kate receives some
>> life-changing news and somebody makes a shocking return to Ambridge.
>> (So who returns - Rob? Matt? any other names?)
>>
>> Matt would be good. I liked him. He was good with Peggy's husband
>> when he developed dementia.
>
> He was a total arsehole who bullied elderly people out of his properties
> in a Rachmanish way, to the point of killing them. No sympathy. Good
> riddance to bad rubbish.

Thus demonstrating one of the long term strengths of TA. Most of the
characters are properly three dimensional, so that Matt could be, and
was, both of those things, at different times and under different
circumstances.

My take on Matt was that I liked him as a character in a drama; as
Lilian once said of him, whatever else he was, he was never boring. I
would detest him though, if I met him in real life.

--
Best wishes, Serena
Q. Why did the baby foal take throat lozenges?
A. Because he was a little horse.

On 03/12/2023 09:13, Serena Blanchflower wrote:
>
> Thus demonstrating one of the long term strengths of TA.

I read this immediately after John saying he had been upgraded to TB 115
and no one had told him. I presumed Serena was going to go on to say
that you could rely on Umrats to keep you abreast of everything you need
to know.
--
Jenny M Benson
Wrexham, UK

On 03/12/2023 10:54, Jenny M Benson wrote:
> On 03/12/2023 09:13, Serena Blanchflower wrote:
>>
>> Thus demonstrating one of the long term strengths of TA.
>
> I read this immediately after John saying he had been upgraded to TB 115
> and no one had told him.  I presumed Serena was going to go on to say
> that you could rely on Umrats to keep you abreast of everything you need
> to know.

Which is definitely very true, as well.

--
Best wishes, Serena
A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy
enough people to make it worth the effort. (Herm Albright)

On 03-Dec-23 9:13, Serena Blanchflower wrote:
> On 02/12/2023 22:21, Rosie Mitchell wrote:
>> Vicky <vicky.ayech@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> SPOILER ALERT - This week's spoiler from the DF
>>>
>>> SPOILER ALERT - This week's spoiler from the DF
>>> The bickering continues over who will win ownership of the Grange Farm
>>> land that’s being offered up at auction. Meanwhile, Kate receives some
>>> life-changing news and somebody makes a shocking return to Ambridge.
>>> (So who returns - Rob? Matt? any other names?)
>>>
>>> Matt would be good.  I liked him.  He was good with Peggy's husband
>>> when he developed dementia.
>>
>> He was a total arsehole who bullied elderly people out of his properties
>> in a Rachmanish way, to the point of killing them. No sympathy. Good
>> riddance to bad rubbish.
>
> Thus demonstrating one of the long term strengths of TA.  Most of the
> characters are properly three dimensional, so that Matt could be, and
> was, both of those things, at different times and under different
> circumstances.
>
> My take on Matt was that I liked him as a character in a drama; as
> Lilian once said of him, whatever else he was, he was never boring.  I
> would detest him though, if I met him in real life.

There certainly are some people who show a moderate level of morality in
their private life, but believe that there is no place for it in
business - their only concerns being:
a) Is it legal? or
b) can I get away with it?

--
Sam Plusnet

Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> writes:

> On 03-Dec-23 9:13, Serena Blanchflower wrote:
>> On 02/12/2023 22:21, Rosie Mitchell wrote:
>>> Vicky <vicky.ayech@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> SPOILER ALERT - This week's spoiler from the DF
>>>>
>>>> SPOILER ALERT - This week's spoiler from the DF
>>>> The bickering continues over who will win ownership of the Grange Farm
>>>> land that’s being offered up at auction. Meanwhile, Kate receives some
>>>> life-changing news and somebody makes a shocking return to Ambridge.
>>>> (So who returns - Rob? Matt? any other names?)
>>>>
>>>> Matt would be good.  I liked him.  He was good with Peggy's husband
>>>> when he developed dementia.
>>>
>>> He was a total arsehole who bullied elderly people out of his properties
>>> in a Rachmanish way, to the point of killing them. No sympathy. Good
>>> riddance to bad rubbish.
>> Thus demonstrating one of the long term strengths of TA.  Most of
>> the characters are properly three dimensional, so that Matt could
>> be, and was, both of those things, at different times and under
>> different circumstances.
>> My take on Matt was that I liked him as a character in a drama; as
>> Lilian once said of him, whatever else he was, he was never boring. 
>> I would detest him though, if I met him in real life.
>
> There certainly are some people who show a moderate level of morality
> in their private life, but believe that there is no place for it in
> business - their only concerns being:
> a) Is it legal? or
> b) can I get away with it?

Shafting your rivals is one thing. Shafting your customers is quite
another.

Rosie

On 03-Dec-23 21:41, Rosie Mitchell wrote:
> Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> writes:
>
>> On 03-Dec-23 9:13, Serena Blanchflower wrote:
>>> On 02/12/2023 22:21, Rosie Mitchell wrote:
>>>> Vicky <vicky.ayech@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> SPOILER ALERT - This week's spoiler from the DF
>>>>>
>>>>> SPOILER ALERT - This week's spoiler from the DF
>>>>> The bickering continues over who will win ownership of the Grange Farm
>>>>> land that’s being offered up at auction. Meanwhile, Kate receives some
>>>>> life-changing news and somebody makes a shocking return to Ambridge.
>>>>> (So who returns - Rob? Matt? any other names?)
>>>>>
>>>>> Matt would be good.  I liked him.  He was good with Peggy's husband
>>>>> when he developed dementia.
>>>>
>>>> He was a total arsehole who bullied elderly people out of his properties
>>>> in a Rachmanish way, to the point of killing them. No sympathy. Good
>>>> riddance to bad rubbish.
>>> Thus demonstrating one of the long term strengths of TA.  Most of
>>> the characters are properly three dimensional, so that Matt could
>>> be, and was, both of those things, at different times and under
>>> different circumstances.
>>> My take on Matt was that I liked him as a character in a drama; as
>>> Lilian once said of him, whatever else he was, he was never boring.
>>> I would detest him though, if I met him in real life.
>>
>> There certainly are some people who show a moderate level of morality
>> in their private life, but believe that there is no place for it in
>> business - their only concerns being:
>> a) Is it legal? or
>> b) can I get away with it?
>
> Shafting your rivals is one thing. Shafting your customers is quite
> another.

Those customers _are_ rivals in a way. The more money they get to keep,
the less there is in it for you[1].
Shafting your customers might cause them to go elsewhere - so avoiding
that can be good business, not morality.

[1] Horribly mercantilist, but still.

--
Sam Plusnet

On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 00:45:25 +0000, Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:

>On 03-Dec-23 21:41, Rosie Mitchell wrote:
>> Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 03-Dec-23 9:13, Serena Blanchflower wrote:
>>>> On 02/12/2023 22:21, Rosie Mitchell wrote:
>>>>> Vicky <vicky.ayech@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> SPOILER ALERT - This week's spoiler from the DF
>>>>>>
>>>>>> SPOILER ALERT - This week's spoiler from the DF
>>>>>> The bickering continues over who will win ownership of the Grange Farm
>>>>>> land that’s being offered up at auction. Meanwhile, Kate receives some
>>>>>> life-changing news and somebody makes a shocking return to Ambridge.
>>>>>> (So who returns - Rob? Matt? any other names?)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Matt would be good.  I liked him.  He was good with Peggy's husband
>>>>>> when he developed dementia.
>>>>>
>>>>> He was a total arsehole who bullied elderly people out of his properties
>>>>> in a Rachmanish way, to the point of killing them. No sympathy. Good
>>>>> riddance to bad rubbish.
>>>> Thus demonstrating one of the long term strengths of TA.  Most of
>>>> the characters are properly three dimensional, so that Matt could
>>>> be, and was, both of those things, at different times and under
>>>> different circumstances.
>>>> My take on Matt was that I liked him as a character in a drama; as
>>>> Lilian once said of him, whatever else he was, he was never boring.
>>>> I would detest him though, if I met him in real life.
>>>
>>> There certainly are some people who show a moderate level of morality
>>> in their private life, but believe that there is no place for it in
>>> business - their only concerns being:
>>> a) Is it legal? or
>>> b) can I get away with it?
>>
>> Shafting your rivals is one thing. Shafting your customers is quite
>> another.
>
>Those customers _are_ rivals in a way. The more money they get to keep,
>the less there is in it for you[1].
>Shafting your customers might cause them to go elsewhere - so avoiding
>that can be good business, not morality.
>
>[1] Horribly mercantilist, but still.

I've always liked to think of myself as the anti-matter version of
Matt Crawford - well, maybe not always because I don't think he had
appeared in Ambridge when I was first running my business - though I'm
sure there are some people who think I was deluding myself about that.

- Always treat your customers honestly and fairly but if they try to
swindle you, never do business with them again.

- Always treat your suppliers honestly and fairly and pay them on
time. Expect them to treat their customers (i.e. - me) honestly and
fairly and to treat their suppliers likewise. And if they didn't do
that, I'd drop them.

Of course if you drop exclusive suppliers of very desirable stuff
there is an element of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face and
one result of that was I never accumulated a fabulously flush bank
account or a big house in acres of land - which I suppose is another
aspect of being an anti-matter Matt.

Nick

On Mon, 04 Dec 2023 06:17:09 +0000, Nick Odell <nickodell49@yahoo.ca>
wrote:

>Of course if you drop exclusive suppliers of very desirable stuff
>there is an element of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face and
>one result of that was I never accumulated a fabulously flush bank
>account or a big house in acres of land - which I suppose is another
>aspect of being an anti-matter Matt.

Well, he doesn't seem to have those things either. A better example of
those who are not like you and do get the good things are Justin
Elliot and Martin unbrella.

Nick Odell <nickodell49@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 00:45:25 +0000, Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
>
>> On 03-Dec-23 21:41, Rosie Mitchell wrote:
>>> Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 03-Dec-23 9:13, Serena Blanchflower wrote:
>>>>> On 02/12/2023 22:21, Rosie Mitchell wrote:
>>>>>> Vicky <vicky.ayech@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> SPOILER ALERT - This week's spoiler from the DF
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> SPOILER ALERT - This week's spoiler from the DF
>>>>>>> The bickering continues over who will win ownership of the Grange Farm
>>>>>>> land that’s being offered up at auction. Meanwhile, Kate receives some
>>>>>>> life-changing news and somebody makes a shocking return to Ambridge.
>>>>>>> (So who returns - Rob? Matt? any other names?)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Matt would be good.  I liked him.  He was good with Peggy's husband
>>>>>>> when he developed dementia.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He was a total arsehole who bullied elderly people out of his properties
>>>>>> in a Rachmanish way, to the point of killing them. No sympathy. Good
>>>>>> riddance to bad rubbish.
>>>>> Thus demonstrating one of the long term strengths of TA.  Most of
>>>>> the characters are properly three dimensional, so that Matt could
>>>>> be, and was, both of those things, at different times and under
>>>>> different circumstances.
>>>>> My take on Matt was that I liked him as a character in a drama; as
>>>>> Lilian once said of him, whatever else he was, he was never boring.
>>>>> I would detest him though, if I met him in real life.
>>>>
>>>> There certainly are some people who show a moderate level of morality
>>>> in their private life, but believe that there is no place for it in
>>>> business - their only concerns being:
>>>> a) Is it legal? or
>>>> b) can I get away with it?
>>>
>>> Shafting your rivals is one thing. Shafting your customers is quite
>>> another.
>>
>> Those customers _are_ rivals in a way. The more money they get to keep,
>> the less there is in it for you[1].
>> Shafting your customers might cause them to go elsewhere - so avoiding
>> that can be good business, not morality.
>>
>> [1] Horribly mercantilist, but still.
>
> I've always liked to think of myself as the anti-matter version of
> Matt Crawford - well, maybe not always because I don't think he had
> appeared in Ambridge when I was first running my business - though I'm
> sure there are some people who think I was deluding myself about that.
>
> - Always treat your customers honestly and fairly but if they try to
> swindle you, never do business with them again.
>
> - Always treat your suppliers honestly and fairly and pay them on
> time. Expect them to treat their customers (i.e. - me) honestly and
> fairly and to treat their suppliers likewise. And if they didn't do
> that, I'd drop them.
>
> Of course if you drop exclusive suppliers of very desirable stuff
> there is an element of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face and
> one result of that was I never accumulated a fabulously flush bank
> account or a big house in acres of land - which I suppose is another
> aspect of being an anti-matter Matt.
>
> Nick
>

I had some scaffolding erected around part of the property earlier this
year - for some remedial work to be carried out on the solar panel
installation. The work had been carried out sloppily in the first instance
so it was at the expense of the installers. Some time after the work was
completed properly, I was waiting for the scaffolding to be removed - I
waited - contacted the installers again and pointed out that the
scaffolding had not been removed yet. I waited (rinse and repeat) …
eventually, I contacted the scaffolder direct and he informed me the
installers had not paid him despite supplying his invoice… I contacted the
installers and pointed out that I had always paid their invoices very
promptly and that the least they could do was reciprocate with their
suppliers and pay up please. It took a few more days but it was completed
the following week after lots of excuses about allocated invoice settlement
days and overworked office staff!

--
Toodle Pip, Mike McMillan

Vicky <vicky.ayech@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Dec 2023 06:17:09 +0000, Nick Odell <nickodell49@yahoo.ca>
> wrote:
>
>> Of course if you drop exclusive suppliers of very desirable stuff
>> there is an element of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face and
>> one result of that was I never accumulated a fabulously flush bank
>> account or a big house in acres of land - which I suppose is another
>> aspect of being an anti-matter Matt.
>
> Well, he doesn't seem to have those things either. A better example of
> those who are not like you and do get the good things are Justin
> Elliot and Martin unbrella.
>

Has anyone caught up with Martin Umbrella for fiddling his expenses yet?

--
Toodle Pip, Mike McMillan

Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
> On 03-Dec-23 9:13, Serena Blanchflower wrote:
>> On 02/12/2023 22:21, Rosie Mitchell wrote:
>>> Vicky <vicky.ayech@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> SPOILER ALERT - This week's spoiler from the DF
>>>>
>>>> SPOILER ALERT - This week's spoiler from the DF
>>>> The bickering continues over who will win ownership of the Grange Farm
>>>> land that’s being offered up at auction. Meanwhile, Kate receives some
>>>> life-changing news and somebody makes a shocking return to Ambridge.
>>>> (So who returns - Rob? Matt? any other names?)
>>>>
>>>> Matt would be good.  I liked him.  He was good with Peggy's husband
>>>> when he developed dementia.
>>>
>>> He was a total arsehole who bullied elderly people out of his properties
>>> in a Rachmanish way, to the point of killing them. No sympathy. Good
>>> riddance to bad rubbish.
>>
>> Thus demonstrating one of the long term strengths of TA.  Most of the
>> characters are properly three dimensional, so that Matt could be, and
>> was, both of those things, at different times and under different
>> circumstances.
>>
>> My take on Matt was that I liked him as a character in a drama; as
>> Lilian once said of him, whatever else he was, he was never boring.  I
>> would detest him though, if I met him in real life.
>
> There certainly are some people who show a moderate level of morality in
> their private life, but believe that there is no place for it in
> business - their only concerns being:
> a) Is it legal? or
> b) can I get away with it?
>

It even extends to Greenwashing:-(((

--
Toodle Pip, Mike McMillan

In message <cnqqmipasd9pjgh486372sr3caimhtrd1b@4ax.com> at Mon, 4 Dec
2023 06:17:09, Nick Odell <nickodell49@yahoo.ca> writes
[]
>I've always liked to think of myself as the anti-matter version of
>Matt Crawford - well, maybe not always because I don't think he had
>appeared in Ambridge when I was first running my business - though I'm
>sure there are some people who think I was deluding myself about that.
>
>- Always treat your customers honestly and fairly but if they try to
>swindle you, never do business with them again.
>
>- Always treat your suppliers honestly and fairly and pay them on
>time. Expect them to treat their customers (i.e. - me) honestly and
>fairly and to treat their suppliers likewise. And if they didn't do
>that, I'd drop them.

I tend to be similar - well, I don't have customers as I've never been a
business, but I retain a very long memory of when I've been badly
treated, and don't use them again.
>
>Of course if you drop exclusive suppliers of very desirable stuff
>there is an element of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face and
>one result of that was I never accumulated a fabulously flush bank
>account or a big house in acres of land - which I suppose is another
>aspect of being an anti-matter Matt.

It's also a matter of publicity, or lack of access to it: despite things
like twitter, there's in practice little way for the little man (us) to
really _publicise_ bad traders/companies - without spending significant
money (that is unlikely to be retrieved), anyway. (Writing/whatever to
consumer prog.s rarely gets any response - and when you do, your message
may well be twisted [without necessarily deliberate intent].) "Freedom
of the press is limited to those who have one."

It's applied in life in general too, not just trading: By doing what I
consider _right_, my career progression did not proceed as well as it
should have (or at least as well as others' did).

Hope the above doesn't make me sound bitter - I'm not, I'm reasonably
content!
>
> Nick
John
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"Everyone is entitled to an *informed* opinion." - Harlan Ellison

Serena Blanchflower <nospam@blanchflower.me.uk> wrote:
> On 02/12/2023 22:21, Rosie Mitchell wrote:
>> Vicky <vicky.ayech@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> SPOILER ALERT - This week's spoiler from the DF
>>>
>>> SPOILER ALERT - This week's spoiler from the DF
>>> The bickering continues over who will win ownership of the Grange Farm
>>> land that’s being offered up at auction. Meanwhile, Kate receives some
>>> life-changing news and somebody makes a shocking return to Ambridge.
>>> (So who returns - Rob? Matt? any other names?)
>>>
>>> Matt would be good. I liked him. He was good with Peggy's husband
>>> when he developed dementia.
>>
>> He was a total arsehole who bullied elderly people out of his properties
>> in a Rachmanish way, to the point of killing them. No sympathy. Good
>> riddance to bad rubbish.
>
> Thus demonstrating one of the long term strengths of TA. Most of the
> characters are properly three dimensional, so that Matt could be, and
> was, both of those things, at different times and under different
> circumstances.
>
> My take on Matt was that I liked him as a character in a drama; as
> Lilian once said of him, whatever else he was, he was never boring. I
> would detest him though, if I met him in real life.
>
>

She wasn’t wrong there.

Mrs McT

Serena Blanchflower <nospam@blanchflower.me.uk> writes:

> On 02/12/2023 22:21, Rosie Mitchell wrote:
>> Vicky <vicky.ayech@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> SPOILER ALERT - This week's spoiler from the DF
>>>
>>> SPOILER ALERT - This week's spoiler from the DF
>>> The bickering continues over who will win ownership of the Grange Farm
>>> land that’s being offered up at auction. Meanwhile, Kate receives some
>>> life-changing news and somebody makes a shocking return to Ambridge.
>>> (So who returns - Rob? Matt? any other names?)
>>>
>>> Matt would be good. I liked him. He was good with Peggy's husband
>>> when he developed dementia.
>> He was a total arsehole who bullied elderly people out of his
>> properties
>> in a Rachmanish way, to the point of killing them. No sympathy. Good
>> riddance to bad rubbish.
>
> Thus demonstrating one of the long term strengths of TA. Most of the
> characters are properly three dimensional, so that Matt could be, and
> was, both of those things, at different times and under different
> circumstances.
>
> My take on Matt was that I liked him as a character in a drama; as
> Lilian once said of him, whatever else he was, he was never boring. I
> would detest him though, if I met him in real life.

I liked Stanley Kowalski as a character in a drama but he was an
absolute bastard all the dame.

Rosie

On 04/12/2023 19:31, Rosie Mitchell wrote:

>
> I liked Stanley Kowalski as a character in a drama but he was an
> absolute bastard all the dame.
>

Oh no he wasn't!

john

Vicky <vicky.ayech@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Dec 2023 06:17:09 +0000, Nick Odell <nickodell49@yahoo.ca>
> wrote:
>
>> Of course if you drop exclusive suppliers of very desirable stuff
>> there is an element of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face and
>> one result of that was I never accumulated a fabulously flush bank
>> account or a big house in acres of land - which I suppose is another
>> aspect of being an anti-matter Matt.
>
> Well, he doesn't seem to have those things either. A better example of
> those who are not like you and do get the good things are Justin
> Elliot and Martin unbrella.
>

Martin umbrella Gibson

Mrs McT

Chris <chris.mcmillan@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> Vicky <vicky.ayech@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 04 Dec 2023 06:17:09 +0000, Nick Odell <nickodell49@yahoo.ca>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Of course if you drop exclusive suppliers of very desirable stuff
>>> there is an element of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face and
>>> one result of that was I never accumulated a fabulously flush bank
>>> account or a big house in acres of land - which I suppose is another
>>> aspect of being an anti-matter Matt.
>>
>> Well, he doesn't seem to have those things either. A better example of
>> those who are not like you and do get the good things are Justin
>> Elliot and Martin unbrella.
>>
>
> Martin umbrella Gibson

A pedant writes: Martyn umbrella Gibson.

Wenlock <wenlock.house@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Chris <chris.mcmillan@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>> Vicky <vicky.ayech@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 04 Dec 2023 06:17:09 +0000, Nick Odell <nickodell49@yahoo.ca>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Of course if you drop exclusive suppliers of very desirable stuff
>>>> there is an element of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face and
>>>> one result of that was I never accumulated a fabulously flush bank
>>>> account or a big house in acres of land - which I suppose is another
>>>> aspect of being an anti-matter Matt.
>>>
>>> Well, he doesn't seem to have those things either. A better example of
>>> those who are not like you and do get the good things are Justin
>>> Elliot and Martin unbrella.
>>>
>>
>> Martin umbrella Gibson
>
> A pedant writes: Martyn umbrella Gibson.
>
>
>

Wouldn’t that be the gurly wurly version?

--
Toodle Pip, Mike McMillan

Mike McMillan <toodle.pip1@virginmedia.com> writes:

> Wenlock <wenlock.house@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> Chris <chris.mcmillan@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>> Vicky <vicky.ayech@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 04 Dec 2023 06:17:09 +0000, Nick Odell <nickodell49@yahoo.ca>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Of course if you drop exclusive suppliers of very desirable stuff
>>>>> there is an element of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face and
>>>>> one result of that was I never accumulated a fabulously flush bank
>>>>> account or a big house in acres of land - which I suppose is another
>>>>> aspect of being an anti-matter Matt.
>>>>
>>>> Well, he doesn't seem to have those things either. A better example of
>>>> those who are not like you and do get the good things are Justin
>>>> Elliot and Martin unbrella.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Martin umbrella Gibson
>>
>> A pedant writes: Martyn umbrella Gibson.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Wouldn’t that be the gurly wurly version?

More of a Toffee Crysp.

Rosie
BTM elect

On 04/12/2023 09:38, Mike McMillan wrote:

<snipped>

> I had some scaffolding erected around part of the property earlier this
> year - for some remedial work to be carried out on the solar panel
> installation. The work had been carried out sloppily in the first instance
> so it was at the expense of the installers. Some time after the work was
> completed properly, I was waiting for the scaffolding to be removed - I
> waited - contacted the installers again and pointed out that the
> scaffolding had not been removed yet.

IME, scaffolders will leave the scaffolding up until they need it for
another job, and will have lots of prepared excuses. Saves storage and
extra trips.

--
Cheers
Clive

Clive Arthur <clive@nowaytoday.co.uk> wrote:
> On 04/12/2023 09:38, Mike McMillan wrote:
>
> <snipped>
>
>> I had some scaffolding erected around part of the property earlier this
>> year - for some remedial work to be carried out on the solar panel
>> installation. The work had been carried out sloppily in the first instance
>> so it was at the expense of the installers. Some time after the work was
>> completed properly, I was waiting for the scaffolding to be removed - I
>> waited - contacted the installers again and pointed out that the
>> scaffolding had not been removed yet.
>
> IME, scaffolders will leave the scaffolding up until they need it for
> another job, and will have lots of prepared excuses. Saves storage and
> extra trips.
>

Full waste skips seem to enjoy a similar status.

--
Toodle Pip, Mike McMillan

Mike McMillan <toodle.pip1@virginmedia.com> wrote:
> Clive Arthur <clive@nowaytoday.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 04/12/2023 09:38, Mike McMillan wrote:
>>
>> <snipped>
>>
>>> I had some scaffolding erected around part of the property earlier this
>>> year - for some remedial work to be carried out on the solar panel
>>> installation. The work had been carried out sloppily in the first instance
>>> so it was at the expense of the installers. Some time after the work was
>>> completed properly, I was waiting for the scaffolding to be removed - I
>>> waited - contacted the installers again and pointed out that the
>>> scaffolding had not been removed yet.
>>
>> IME, scaffolders will leave the scaffolding up until they need it for
>> another job, and will have lots of prepared excuses. Saves storage and
>> extra trips.
>>
>
> Full waste skips seem to enjoy a similar status.
>

Our chap was a one man band. He put it up single handedly, but he whistled
up a mate to take it down.

A friend of ours, who’s totally blind, had solar panels installed on his
roof when they first became available. It wasn’t days or weeks, but
months. Bob even got himself on the front page of one of the local rags (I
think he managed not to get the fact that he’s totally blind into it)! The
scaffolder had legged it. When I related this tale to Bob on the phone the
other day, he just laughed and reminded me!

Mrs McT

On Wed, 6 Dec 2023 17:16:22 +0000, Clive Arthur <clive@nowaytoday.co.uk>
scrawled in the dust...

>On 04/12/2023 09:38, Mike McMillan wrote:
>
><snipped>
>
>> I had some scaffolding erected around part of the property earlier this
>> year - for some remedial work to be carried out on the solar panel
>> installation. The work had been carried out sloppily in the first instance
>> so it was at the expense of the installers. Some time after the work was
>> completed properly, I was waiting for the scaffolding to be removed - I
>> waited - contacted the installers again and pointed out that the
>> scaffolding had not been removed yet.
>
>IME, scaffolders will leave the scaffolding up until they need it for
>another job, and will have lots of prepared excuses. Saves storage and
>extra trips.

When we had scaffolding for the installation of our solar panels, it was
found that the roof needed attention first. The roofers elected to get a
large team together and do the re-roofing over the weekend so the
installation could be done the following week. They were as good as their
word, travelling from Nottinghamshire each day, and including adding
insulation board in the upper part of the roof and ventilated ridge tiles.
On the Monday morning, the scaffolders turned up to remove it. Fortunately
I was at home and stopped them. No one had told them the original job had
been postponed.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959