kevinjohnsonmbe

Did you mean ‘last’ or ‘least’. ?? ?

Nooooooo....... Let it Diiiiiieeeeeeeee

If it's EN 397: 2012, it's allowed.....

Agreed! I can often spend almost as long watching the videos of a task as I do 'doing' the task. Incredibly useful for self analysis. It was a bit worrying (for your safety and financial well being) to see so many 'little' mistakes even over a fairly long time frame. What percentage, as a rough guestimate, would you say were afternoon as opposed to AM? I'm of the view that my little errors are more prevalent around the 14:00 mark, I'll allow myself 1, if a second one occurs I draw stumps and come out of the tree - come back another day.

Pair of muppets! I missed QT, and hadn’t had any wine (it was cider!) ?

It’s an unfortunate, but inevitable, acknowledgement that blunt, consistent, logical and honest delivery of uncomfortable truth is deeply upsetting for the strangely contradictory, apparently delicate, disposition of the loony Left who seem to want shout the loudest but feel mortally offended if anyone dares to shout back. ?

Waiting for Ticketmaster to list the event!!

More likely that you'd have 10,000 empty beer tins, human body parts and waste far and wide, a judicial inquiry on behalf of the HSE, an ASBO instigated by neighbour complaints, a couple of dozen missing persons reports and a set of traumatic experiences that would frighten Kim Jong-un.... But (there it is again!) it might be worth a punt....

Brilliant that you came back with a comprehensive reposte Martin As ever, here comes the “but”... But, I’m confused..... You say you’ve been through the mill with various trades, and, as a consequence, had a go at some things yourself (tree felling included - which ended badly), and you’ve been generally unhappy with some elements, and gone so far as court action..... And I can relate to all of that having also renovated an 1830s farmhouse from near dereliction. I feel you Bro! But the but is.... The biggest lesson from my journey was CHOOSE THE SERVICE PROVIDER WISELY! Sometimes £50, £100, £150/day cash for a casual labour type scenario is entirely appropriate, sometimes is just isn’t. The “I wouldn’t get out of bed for less than £100/day” quote seems to have made quite an impact upon you. But frankly, the ‘cost’ to an employer of providing a man (or woman) @ £100/day is close to 1 ½ times that so why would anyone bother to get out of bed, to get someone out of bed, to work for £100/day? That just leaves the option of ‘the man from the pub’ who will do it for £50-100 cash to top up thier Social (whilst undermining the very principles of the Welfare State so as to have more disposable cash to throw ale down their Gregory.) Take the cheap option and shoulder the responsibility of what happens if things go bad.... or Outsource the job AND the responsibility to someone that you can hold to account if things go bad.... Rarely is it possible to have both!

Are you thinking of a chocolate orange?

Could you tweet back to your mate "Undocumented Immigrant" (on behalf of all sane Bulldog Brit's)... Something like.... It's OK to be confused Ahmed, The 2 parts of the of the story are entirely unrelated and frankly, irrelevant - Gary appears to support Brexit and Cheddar Man appears to have had a tan. Now gather your things, get back across the channel and perhaps try stabilising your own nation rather than leaching off ours, oh, and by the way, try going to the embassy and putting your papers in because for as long as you're 'undocumented' you ain't welcome here chopper.... Huh, what says ya....?

That's enough for me Mark... Perhaps you were right all along? Now, where's my Massai spear and sword, I'm off out to tend the cattle and dance for Ngai.... Cheers for clearing all that up for me

New pads and shoes when you gave the dogs back....

Mr E is just yanking your chain... We all know those attributes don't stop after 30 years and they're certainly not exclusive to the "Right!" Pubs open Mr E!!

I can wholly relate to the 'fringe benefits' that you mention above. Any alternative that represents 'intangible' (untaxable) benefits are good with me - so long as it represents equal advantage to customer AND service provider. There is a good deal more to 'value' than £'s alone. Here comes the but.... But, none of that is intimated in the OP which (by my reading) represents itself as exactly the kind of PITA customer that wants a dozen quotes for a minor task so as to shave £10 off the already pitiful value they have predetermined that the task warrants regardless of the time and effort expended by the people providing the quotes and deserves an fairly immediate and fairly pronounced body swerve. One of the great pleasures of being a service provider is the privilege to decide who you might want to provide your services to, and conversely...... For those that think the privilege of deciding who will do the work sits with the customer alone, good luck. I don't think the discussion has got out of proportion. Post to an arb forum saying you've been ripped off because you don't like a QUOTE - kind of intimating that all tree workers are rip-off merchants. The responses have delivered a fairly balanced nationwide summary which I'd interpret as: Busy, professional outfits seem to be of the - "...it's there or thereabouts territory, or might consider it on the back of a ¾ day...." 'Handymen', the desperate or the very local Saturdays and Sundays brigade - "...would probably knock it over for cash @£150..." Farmers - "...push it over with the tractor..." You pays your money (or, apparently not in this case) you takes your chances....

And then a 100 phone calls a month with "couldyajust's" and "what would you advise for the following's" (which actually means - if you give me the benefit of your years of experience, knowledge and training, I'll get dumbo from next door to do it like you said and hope he doesn't break anything/one.) No thanks - bash it, block number.....

and that, right there, is good “all round” advice!

That wouldn't be news......

The article is trash and biased (Obvs - "...The unpopular media pundit..." ?? No so unpopular for me) in a trash rag read by beret wearing, bearded hypocrites. Yeah, so she's investigating white farmers being murderd and dispossessed - observable historic fact. Given the propensity, in certain quarters, to protest about such matters when it's the distant relatives of indigenous populations complaining about colonial injustice (Rhodes Must Fall for example), you'd think the hysterical reaction to apparent injustice would carry equal weight regardless of the relative skin pigment. It is after all - a strikingly similar scenario. So what....? It's only injustice when its white against black but it doesn't really count when it's the other way around? I'm not sure which sickens me more, the grass roots complainants of the far distant ancestry of the aggrieved indigenous populations, or the hypocritical BS of their sympathisers....

It's an 'ignore thread' scenario, only other option is to tell him he's a ?? and I'm trying to be 'nice' this week!

Just listened Mr E..... It made a pleasant change for JOB (Commander in Chief Bremoantard) not to be bleeding his gums over Brexit...

If the previous owner swapped his wife for a MPT, she must have been a rare old bird!

Cheers Paul!! I'll have a look at those in a bit... HS is an interesting one that could be catching people out. 3 HAV prosecutions in 2017 that I found. Looking back through the year's stats for prosecutions - (builders) falls from height and farmers (generally) seem to be featuring quite high 11/7/17 http://press.hse.gov.uk/2017/engineering-firm-fined-after-exposing-workers-to-hand-arm-vibration-syndrome-havs/ 3/10/17 http://press.hse.gov.uk/2017/council-fined-after-worker-diagnosed-with-havs/ 4/12/17 http://press.hse.gov.uk/2017/company-fined-after-exposing-workers-to-hand-arm-vibration-syndrome-havs/

Having a look at implications of HAVS.... HSE brochure says: a daily EAV of 2.5 m/s2 A(8) that represents a clear risk requiring management; and a daily ELV of 5 m/s2 A(8) that represents a high risk above which employees should not be exposed. (EAV = Exposure action value, ELV = Exposure limit value) Anyone make any sense of the equations and translate them into English before I start Googling etc... The brochure makes for an interesting read (in a certain context!) http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg175.pdf