Vagueness and the Aftermath - A sporadic diary

[RED-DOG]

Mr Red, do you know anything about the grey squirrel?

We have just moved house and the little beggars are in the loft.

Any ideas how to get rid?

Squirrels are not the best thing to have in your loft, they will rip up your insulation, crap in your water tank, and then chew your electric wiring and burn your house down, but....  You don't have to kill them.

To get rid, you will need

Two saucepans

Wire netting

Hammer & nails.

Method.

1: Go into loft and bang pans together until squirrels leave.

2: Fit wire netting over entrance hole, fix in place with hammer & nails.

Thankyou.

Will the critters not chew through the wire netting?

They appear on closer inspection to have already eaten through the plastic fascia board in 2 spots.

They can cut through plastic like a chainsaw (I had to change my plastic bird feeder to a steel one)  but a decent bit of wire mesh (I recommend "Twildweld") will stop em.

[RED-DOG]

Morning folks.

Heres another story from my occasional series entitled "The World Has Gone Mad"

I mean, this piece says, in essence, "Lets make the majority pay for the sins of the few"

WTF?


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8556195.stm

So are they proposing that it'll be a dog registration scheme that will include an element of third-party insurance?  Don't think that's necessarily a bad idea.  I think there should be stricter penalties on those that allow their dogs to foul children's play areas and just leave the mess there for others to deal with.

Also, on a separate but related topic, all cyclists should be forced to get insurance. Pedestrians too for that matter.

Christ Kin, I'm not even going to vex myself by debating this.

[RED-DOG]

My fav pic taken ... My youngest Son Sam.




Time flies, this was taken at Christmas this year ...

That's a great pic Kev and as you have seen, it will get better as time passes.

[DaveShoelace]

Morning folks.

Heres another story from my occasional series entitled "The World Has Gone Mad"

I mean, this piece says, in essence, "Lets make the majority pay for the sins of the few"

WTF?


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8556195.stm

So are they proposing that it'll be a dog registration scheme that will include an element of third-party insurance?  Don't think that's necessarily a bad idea.  I think there should be stricter penalties on those that allow their dogs to foul children's play areas and just leave the mess there for others to deal with.

Also, on a separate but related topic, all cyclists should be forced to get insurance. Pedestrians too for that matter.

Christ Kin, I'm not even going to vex myself by debating this.

Cyclists probably should be forced to get insurance, if they are cycling on the roads especially.

Pedestrians - nope, Kin just trying to sound like he is thinking outside the box a bit imo, get back in that box with us thickos Kin, much nicer.

[typhoon13]

Excellent pics, keep them coming please.

[Geo the Sarge]

Morning folks.

Heres another story from my occasional series entitled "The World Has Gone Mad"

I mean, this piece says, in essence, "Lets make the majority pay for the sins of the few"

WTF?


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8556195.stm

When I lived in Germany, it was compulsory to have some sort of insurance on your children in the event they caused damage.

A much better idea for the UK IMO, far more damage and grief done by people than dogs.

I still have an insurance covering my lads in the event of trouble.

Geo

[kinboshi]

Morning folks.

Heres another story from my occasional series entitled "The World Has Gone Mad"

I mean, this piece says, in essence, "Lets make the majority pay for the sins of the few"

WTF?


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8556195.stm

When I lived in Germany, it was compulsory to have some sort of insurance on your children in the event they caused damage.

A much better idea for the UK IMO, far more damage and grief done by people than dogs.

I still have an insurance covering my lads in the event of trouble.

Geo

This was my point with regards to cyclists and pedestrians.  They cause a considerable amount of accidents (if someone causes it, is it still an accident?) on the roads, resulting in damage to property and injury to people.  When this happens, it's the motorist who pays.  I'm all for mandatory insurance for cyclists.

[Jon MW]

Morning folks.

Heres another story from my occasional series entitled "The World Has Gone Mad"

I mean, this piece says, in essence, "Lets make the majority pay for the sins of the few"

WTF?


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8556195.stm

When I lived in Germany, it was compulsory to have some sort of insurance on your children in the event they caused damage.

A much better idea for the UK IMO, far more damage and grief done by people than dogs.

I still have an insurance covering my lads in the event of trouble.

Geo

This was my point with regards to cyclists and pedestrians.  They cause a considerable amount of accidents (if someone causes it, is it still an accident?) on the roads, resulting in damage to property and injury to people.  When this happens, it's the motorist who pays.  I'm all for mandatory insurance for cyclists.

Any evidence for that?

[Geo the Sarge]

Morning folks.

Heres another story from my occasional series entitled "The World Has Gone Mad"

I mean, this piece says, in essence, "Lets make the majority pay for the sins of the few"

WTF?


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8556195.stm

When I lived in Germany, it was compulsory to have some sort of insurance on your children in the event they caused damage.

A much better idea for the UK IMO, far more damage and grief done by people than dogs.

I still have an insurance covering my lads in the event of trouble.

Geo

This was my point with regards to cyclists and pedestrians.  They cause a considerable amount of accidents (if someone causes it, is it still an accident?) on the roads, resulting in damage to property and injury to people.  When this happens, it's the motorist who pays.  I'm all for mandatory insurance for cyclists.

FML,

I agree with Kin

Geo

[kinboshi]

Morning folks.

Heres another story from my occasional series entitled "The World Has Gone Mad"

I mean, this piece says, in essence, "Lets make the majority pay for the sins of the few"

WTF?


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8556195.stm

When I lived in Germany, it was compulsory to have some sort of insurance on your children in the event they caused damage.

A much better idea for the UK IMO, far more damage and grief done by people than dogs.

I still have an insurance covering my lads in the event of trouble.

Geo

This was my point with regards to cyclists and pedestrians.  They cause a considerable amount of accidents (if someone causes it, is it still an accident?) on the roads, resulting in damage to property and injury to people.  When this happens, it's the motorist who pays.  I'm all for mandatory insurance for cyclists.

Any evidence for that?

I'll have a look for evidence, what sort are you after exactly?  In anecdotal terms,  I've had cyclists go into the side of my car and scratch the paint.  I've seen them do worse damage to other cars, and have seen cars swerve to avoid cyclists who have pulled out and then they've struck walls, etc.  To get any sort of financial compensation for the damage from the cyclist you'd have to go to court and take a civil action against them.  If they don't actually have the money available, you're buggered anyway.  Much the same as with an uninsured car driver. 

So what happens, you claim on your own car insurance.  You pay the excess and your premium goes up.

[kinboshi]

Morning folks.

Heres another story from my occasional series entitled "The World Has Gone Mad"

I mean, this piece says, in essence, "Lets make the majority pay for the sins of the few"

WTF?


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8556195.stm

When I lived in Germany, it was compulsory to have some sort of insurance on your children in the event they caused damage.

A much better idea for the UK IMO, far more damage and grief done by people than dogs.

I still have an insurance covering my lads in the event of trouble.

Geo

This was my point with regards to cyclists and pedestrians.  They cause a considerable amount of accidents (if someone causes it, is it still an accident?) on the roads, resulting in damage to property and injury to people.  When this happens, it's the motorist who pays.  I'm all for mandatory insurance for cyclists.

FML,

I agree with Kin

Geo

Bugger.  Is it too late to edit my post?

[bobAlike]

A young kid of about 7 years of age fell off his bike into the side of a hire car I was driving. The kids mother/father/guardian wasn't anywhere to be seen. All I could do was check he was OK and let him go.
Once the hire company came and collected the car I was left with a £280 repair bill. GG me.

The moral of the story, don't use Avis the effin' rob dogs.

[Jon MW]

Morning folks.

Heres another story from my occasional series entitled "The World Has Gone Mad"

I mean, this piece says, in essence, "Lets make the majority pay for the sins of the few"

WTF?


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8556195.stm

When I lived in Germany, it was compulsory to have some sort of insurance on your children in the event they caused damage.

A much better idea for the UK IMO, far more damage and grief done by people than dogs.

I still have an insurance covering my lads in the event of trouble.

Geo

This was my point with regards to cyclists and pedestrians.  They cause a considerable amount of accidents (if someone causes it, is it still an accident?) on the roads, resulting in damage to property and injury to people.  When this happens, it's the motorist who pays.  I'm all for mandatory insurance for cyclists.

Any evidence for that?

I'll have a look for evidence, what sort are you after exactly?  In anecdotal terms,  I've had cyclists go into the side of my car and scratch the paint.  I've seen them do worse damage to other cars, and have seen cars swerve to avoid cyclists who have pulled out and then they've struck walls, etc.  To get any sort of financial compensation for the damage from the cyclist you'd have to go to court and take a civil action against them.  If they don't actually have the money available, you're buggered anyway.  Much the same as with an uninsured car driver. 

So what happens, you claim on your own car insurance.  You pay the excess and your premium goes up.

I assume you still give the reason in the insurance claim as the damage caused by cyclists?

So counter anecdotally I'd say that when I worked for Hastings Direct, cyclists were mentioned so few times that they didn't even show up in the analysis (however, I was a statistician rather than an underwriter or even a driver - so if there's some "driving" reason why that would be the case then I'll retract that counter-anecdote )

The statistics I've found online is that less than 4% of accidents involve cyclists, I'd suggest that not all of them were the fault of the cyclists; if you're cycling insurance was weighted so that car insurance went down by 4% and cyclists covered that - it wouldn't be entirely unreasonable.

[RED-DOG]

Laaaa laaaa laaaa laaaaa laaaaa laaaaa laaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

[kinboshi]

Morning folks.

Heres another story from my occasional series entitled "The World Has Gone Mad"

I mean, this piece says, in essence, "Lets make the majority pay for the sins of the few"

WTF?


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8556195.stm

When I lived in Germany, it was compulsory to have some sort of insurance on your children in the event they caused damage.

A much better idea for the UK IMO, far more damage and grief done by people than dogs.

I still have an insurance covering my lads in the event of trouble.

Geo

This was my point with regards to cyclists and pedestrians.  They cause a considerable amount of accidents (if someone causes it, is it still an accident?) on the roads, resulting in damage to property and injury to people.  When this happens, it's the motorist who pays.  I'm all for mandatory insurance for cyclists.

Any evidence for that?

I'll have a look for evidence, what sort are you after exactly?  In anecdotal terms,  I've had cyclists go into the side of my car and scratch the paint.  I've seen them do worse damage to other cars, and have seen cars swerve to avoid cyclists who have pulled out and then they've struck walls, etc.  To get any sort of financial compensation for the damage from the cyclist you'd have to go to court and take a civil action against them.  If they don't actually have the money available, you're buggered anyway.  Much the same as with an uninsured car driver. 

So what happens, you claim on your own car insurance.  You pay the excess and your premium goes up.

I assume you still give the reason in the insurance claim as the damage caused by cyclists?

So counter anecdotally I'd say that when I worked for Hastings Direct, cyclists were mentioned so few times that they didn't even show up in the analysis (however, I was a statistician rather than an underwriter or even a driver - so if there's some "driving" reason why that would be the case then I'll retract that counter-anecdote )

The statistics I've found online is that less than 4% of accidents involve cyclists, I'd suggest that not all of them were the fault of the cyclists; if you're cycling insurance was weighted so that car insurance went down by 4% and cyclists covered that - it wouldn't be entirely unreasonable.

Just want them covered for the accidents they cause.  As you've said it's not billions of pounds, so the premiums won't be so high.

Then pedestrians...