Gary Prentice

I'd have held out for a priority VIP delivery service too.

And what makes you think that

Sorry Vesp, I don't post to be amusing. I imagine it's not much fun being pulled for your inconsistencies between posts and being badgered. Then again if you persist in trolling you can't really moan can ya? TTFN

Every time I get a refusal to validate because a planning officer wants something that isn't obligatory I fight it just out of principle. It's not hard to know the regs better than them, but they will argue the toss because 'they are the council' so must be right ! You need to be persistent to make them concede that they have no authority when they don't. If the department won't play ball you just go up the chain to you get it sorted. I had a great deal of satisfaction last year/year before with the head of the council. Keep at it because in the long run it makes things easier for yourself, not having to mess about with unnecessary info in apps/notices. Some of the developers and their planning consultants are saying that asking for more information, more surveys and reports or refusing to validate an application because of some spurious missing detail is becoming a common ploy to extend deadlines beyond statutory periods by understaffed planning departments. Just to spoil your day a bit more, I got an application determined in less than two weeks last month.

I'm not even sure that that would be a enforceable planning condition to start with. I wouldn't want to be waiting for a council officer (probably on flexi-time) to turn up around mid-morning before cracking on with the job. If they wouldn't agree to a pre-start date meeting, just to discuss the works, I'd politely state that on the day would be fine, but to comply with H&S regs you need a site specific risk assessment and Method Statement. Asking for a CSCS/Rolo card might be pushing it a bit. I don't know, but kind of think the need to oversee things on the start day might diminish a bit.

No, but I read that Mick Dempsey reckons he has a masters in bating! Thought that was another thread entirely...

If Steve is at home with a young dolly bird I think his wife is going to be awfully annoyed if she finds out!

I'm changing nothing, just pointing out where you are ducking and diving, evading questions or changing content and context between your posts to suit yourself. You dropped a clanger when you admitted that if the dogs were equally matched you'd consider letting them fight. You didn't say the purpose of that was to allow your dog to defend itself. You've revealed something about yourself that I suspect you would rather not have done. What type of person would encourage or allow animals to fight? Oh the sort of people that go to illegal dogfights> I suppose that you've a reasonable argument, in your mind, to support that too? BTW I suspect that most people find you more annoying than entertaining. Why not start a poll to answer that question?

Thought you had a Degree in sarcasm?

Legend!

I wish it was that easy....

You didn't say that, that if your dog was being attacked you'd let it attack. You said if the other dog was fairly meaty you'd consider or be tempted to let them fight. Oh, another example of changing things to suit your argument. Anyone I doubt you'd ever be in that situation cos you'd just threaten it by waving your boot around and it would surely run away While you're in a mood to answer questions, can you tell me if I'm correct in my assumption of the game plan?

We know that you're right, but he's such a good troll that some of us just can't help ourselves. We know that it's wrong, we know that there is no benefit to responding but we just just have to. We probably need a mentor and a ten step program to get over this and get clean.

Don't flatter yourself. You didn't respond to my comment btw. That you'd willingly let a dog on a lead lose to attack another. Guess you're a real animal lover then? I know that you think you were unfairly treated when you got banned. So is tonight part of a game plan to provoke others into bad language or aggressive posts? so that you can run back to Steve and say "look at what they have said! "

You truly can make something out of nothing, twist words to your own ends to suit your argument or opinion. Try to answer one question honestly. Do you think that is an admirable trait or that people respect you for it? Or are you really deluded?

Just about all of them. List them again and I will answer every single one.

Are you for real? The greyhound was on a lead ie under control. Everything that occured was due to another dog not on a lead which belonged to a woman who couldn't call it back to her i.e it wasn't properly trained! Excuse me, I'm saying that we can control dogs, but realistically they're animals and what they will do or how they will react in extremis can't be 100% predicted by anyone. A responsible owner can only take reasonable precautions based on knowledge and experience, like keeping the dog on a lead. That way the dog can't run off and harass, bite another simple aint it. Saying that you'd put your dog behind you while threatening the other is just laughable. Waving your boot around to a yapping dog to threaten it don't work. Do you really think that it would? It's becoming fairly plain that you're trying to lay the blame on Stubby's sister to invoke reaction. Only one person could be said to have no control over their dog, at all, in this situation and it wasn't her. Anyway I'm not wasting any more time on you, besides I'm out of 50p coins. I'm out

Firsty I know that getting in the middle of fighting dogs can result in a bite, as already said. If anyone got bit because of an unrestrained dog, well, I'd be wanting to cause GBH on the owner. You are saying that you'd kick the dog, so because others (like my missus) wouldn't then they must have let their dog have enough leash to attack? Have you thought that your experience is based on walking dogs when you were younger and probably fitter than Stubbys sister. I'm assuming that they are similarly aged, she may be weaker and only four foot tall for all I know) I think that it says something about you that you'd even consider letting your dogs go to get in a fight with another dog. Most owners wouldn't want to risk either (any)dog getting hurt.

Westie knows (I trust) that it's only banter. His response is likely to be more corrosive than that cos he's clever loike

I have a new mental image of you now

So that's the sharpest tool in the box? That explains what everyone's been saying about ya

Little man syndrome. I's always the yorkie that wants to fight our rotties.

Stubby, get a solicitor as soon as you can. Everything will be against your sister as it's the way the system works. She needs to get the dog back from the kennels because the level of care in them is disgusting (I have first hand personal knowledge). The police are pretty useless in their application of the law on dogs but once the system starts it's almost impossible to get out of it until it's run its course IMO I'm sympathetic to the dog that's died, but that's entirely the owners fault for not controlling her own dog. we walk our rotties at a quite spot and put them on a lead immediately we see another dog but have numerous arguments when other twats let their dog run yapping around ours cos "They are friendly". Common sense is just to prevent something starting rather than trying to resolve a dog fight. EDIT: Misread the first post and thought the police had seized the dog now.