Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
Max777
Over 90 days ago
Straight Male, 71
0 miles · Tyne and Wear

Forum

Quote by deancannock
The word ,,,, correct me if I am wrong here...is....they are elected representatives !!! Now where I come from that means they represent those that elected them.....not rocket science. I would expect my representative to listen to the arguments put forward and vote in a way that he would think is best for me and the country. If I don't like the way he represented me , I can choose to vote for another next time.

C'mon Dean, that's a very naive view of how parliament works. Very, very few MPs get to have a free vote, in the main they have to vote the way they are instructed by the party whips
Quote by GnV
Welcome back! I remember you smile

You're the one who made my dreams come true
Frankie Ifield no less.....showing your age G wink
And you no less Max for recognising it :lol2:
Hard to believe but he's still touring. Wonder if he can still yodel?
Quote by GnV
Welcome back! I remember you smile

You're the one who made my dreams come true
Frankie Ifield no less.....showing your age G wink
Quote by MidsCouple24
good to see you voicing your opinion and your opinion is respected even when I don't agree with it.

I would really start to worry if I ever found that we were in agreement
Quote by MidsCouple24
Just as well your income doesn't run to luxuries!
But thankfully Sasha's does and she pays for her own parties I only organise them wink don't we all love to spend other people's money lol

:Mids, you talk a pile of :censored:
Quote by MidsCouple24

I would claim on my house insurance if I could have afforded some but my income doesn't run to luxuries :sad:
Quote by MidsCouple24
Happy Birthday - now spare a thought for me, I am organising a birthday party for Sasha as I do every year, she starts reminding me about it on the 1st March every year, (29th February in Leap Years)
The reason she starts then is because that is the day after my own birthday party.
So far I have organised
2 venues (a restaurant and a swingers club) for the party
2 limousines
2 Hostesses from the local lap dancing club to hand out the champagne
Ordered a dance pole for home
Taken delivery of the laser lighting for the dance room
Ordered her various outfits, (cocktail dress, lingerie evening gown and 2 pair of shoes)
taken delivery the engraved gifts which are prizes for the guests (30 of them)
taken delivery of 37 items large and small to decorate the venue (including 100 balloons and helium)
had the invites printed and given many out with many more to go
Confirmed the first 42 guests (expecting that number to triple
Organised the champagne for the guests arrival
Booked a professional DJ
Ordered the evening gowns and shoes for the hostesses (4 pairs/dresses)
Put the adverts out on 5 swingers sites
Still to start
Prepare the garden for a sunny afternoon option of a drink in the sun
Decorate the dance room
have a nervous breakdown
Still I should have it all ready, after all the party isn't happening until the end of July lol

Just as well your income doesn't run to luxuries!
Quote by MidsCouple24
You might not think so, reading this thread but my security is not bad and getting better.
We have outside cameras recording what is going on and it is this footage that meant we were able to give the Police the Vehicle used and registration number which meant that they were picked up less than an hour later heading back home on the M6.
We have erected 8ft high fencing all round the rear of our garden and there is security lighting everywhere which makes it like daylight when dark.
We have internal bolts and deadlocks and chain locks on all our doors.
Our neighbours are good and did give statements to the Police and turned up in court to give evidence which as it turned out was not needed, my neighbours are Polish and needed an interpreter at the court, they could have just kept quiet if they had wanted to.
We have 2 dogs whilst not being of the "deterrent" type do bark when anyone approaches the back garden.
We have lighting on time switches which turn on and off at various intervals in different rooms and we have burglar alarms fitted for when we are not home.
The problem is that on this occasion the criminals came through the front door when I opened it, they were tooled up and making a quick "smash and grab" raid feeling confident that they would be in and out before Police could arrive and they got that part right but did not bargain for the cameras the recording parts of which are concealed.

So you regard house insurance as a luxury yet you have outside cameras, lights on timers and have erected an 8 foot high fence all around the rear of your house dunno
Quote by MidsCouple24
They have no assets and would dispose of anything they do have to family on paper as soon as the was issued.
I would claim on my house insurance if I could have afforded some but my income doesn't run to luxuries :sad:

I would regard house insurance as a necessity rather than a luxury. Luxuries to me would be membership of swinging clubs and cigarettes. Each to their own.
The claim was made in two formats, as part of the statement I made, the Police asked about any damages and the cost then I got a letter from the Witness assistance people with a claim form and another on the day of the trial so that the Judge could award damages/compensation but as they were never tried for the offence no compensation/damages could be awarded.
If anyone can advise on taking out a civil suit against them I would appreciate the advice but as they have never been convicted of entering the property or doing any damage not sure where I stand on this.

You could issue a county court summons and claim for the cost of the damage but unless the defendants have assets, you could be wasting your time.
Go see a solicitor or the Citizens Advice Bureau. They were convicted of a crime during which your property was damaged. I can't see how you can't have a claim for compensation. Or go to see your Member of Parliament!
Have you tried claiming on your house insurance?
Quote by MidsCouple24
No I mean I caught them ransacking and damaging my house, this was also witnessed by Sasha and a friend who stays with us and 2 Polish guys who live opposite who all completed witness statements and turned up at Court when required, forensic evidence confirmed the identities of the burglars and evidence was found in their vehicle when arrested on the motorway, they were also carrying the hammers and knives used in the assault. They were promptly arrested and as one was on tag and had broken the conditions of the tagging order by leaving his town of residence (Lytham St Annes) he was remanded in custody for 7 months until the trial the other 2 were put on bail.
Charges against the driver were later dropped as there was not enough evidence to prove he knew what was going on during the burglary the other 2 were charged with aggravated burglary and assault with a weapon.
They pleaded not guilty but on the day of the trial changed their pleas to guilty of assault and not guilty of aggravated burglary (max sentence for that is 14 yrs) as a plea bargain, the one who broke his tagging order was given 14 months imprisonment and released the next day because he had already served 7 months on remand, the other guy was given an 18month suspended sentence.
Because the were never tried or convicted of the burglar I cannot claim compensation for the damage caused during that offence.

There was no need to repost your initial post. I was trying to understand who your claim was against? Who were you attempting to claim compensation from? Insurance company? defendants? You don't make that clear.
Why not take out a civil action against them in order to reclaim the costs of the damage.
Quote by MidsCouple24
The sentence
1 got 14 months for assault, as he had been on remand for 7 months he was freed immediately.
Apart from the long list of convictions he already has for drug taking, drug dealing, assault and other such nice things it is just another thing for Judges to disregard in the future.
The charge of aggravated burglary was dropped (possible sentence 14yrs) and the charge of assault with a deadly weapon (they were carrying knives and a hammer) was reduced to one of assault in order to get them to change their plea from not guilty to guilty and save some taxpayers money.
The second one got 18months probation, he was not held in custody because unlike the other one he wasn't already on tag when the offence was committed and therefore did not break any of the rules of being tagged.
5 witnesses for the prosecution turned up in court including 2 polish neighbours and the girlfriend of one of the accused. Forensic evidence was good and the weapons described by the witnesses were found in the defendants car when they were stopped and arrested.
My claim for £1000+ in damages after they had rampaged in the house smashing TV's and such with the hammer was refused as they were never convicted of the burglary.
So I lose the criminals win and the Government think they have saved some money by not having to go to trial.
Truth is these guys will re-offend soon and more Police time Court Time, Probation Service time will be spent on dealing with them, probably more than would be spent by trying them and imprisoning them for offences committed years ago for which they should still be locked up and should have been locked up instead of attacking my family and my home.

I'm a little confused Jed. On 17th Jan you wrote "They were caught within the hour and have been held in custody ever since despite numerous appeals for bail. This was based on the information given to me by the Police at the time, which later proved to be incorrect as with a lot of information in this case, for example I was yesterday informed of the sentencing by the court, I had found out myself on the day of the hearing using the internet " yet above you state that one of the accused had not been held in custody. In the same post, you mention that one of them had previously been convicted of murder, did you forget to include that in the list of 'previous' in the above post? They had previous convictions I was not aware of these I listed seeing no need to list the convictions I had already listed albeit some of those convictions I found out about later were the same as those I listed but for offences committed at a different time
Who was your claim for £1000+ damages against that you say has been refused?
It was against those that ran round my house with hammers smashing tv screens
Do you mean you issued court proceedings against them?
Quote by MidsCouple24
The sentence
1 got 14 months for assault, as he had been on remand for 7 months he was freed immediately.
Apart from the long list of convictions he already has for drug taking, drug dealing, assault and other such nice things it is just another thing for Judges to disregard in the future.
The charge of aggravated burglary was dropped (possible sentence 14yrs) and the charge of assault with a deadly weapon (they were carrying knives and a hammer) was reduced to one of assault in order to get them to change their plea from not guilty to guilty and save some taxpayers money.
The second one got 18months probation, he was not held in custody because unlike the other one he wasn't already on tag when the offence was committed and therefore did not break any of the rules of being tagged.
5 witnesses for the prosecution turned up in court including 2 polish neighbours and the girlfriend of one of the accused. Forensic evidence was good and the weapons described by the witnesses were found in the defendants car when they were stopped and arrested.
My claim for £1000+ in damages after they had rampaged in the house smashing TV's and such with the hammer was refused as they were never convicted of the burglary.
So I lose the criminals win and the Government think they have saved some money by not having to go to trial.
Truth is these guys will re-offend soon and more Police time Court Time, Probation Service time will be spent on dealing with them, probably more than would be spent by trying them and imprisoning them for offences committed years ago for which they should still be locked up and should have been locked up instead of attacking my family and my home.

I'm a little confused Jed. On 17th Jan you wrote "They were caught within the hour and have been held in custody ever since despite numerous appeals for bail. " yet above you state that one of the accused had not been held in custody. In the same post, you mention that one of them had previously been convicted of murder, did you forget to include that in the list of 'previous' in the above post?
Who was your claim for £1000+ damages against that you say has been refused?
Quote by Toots

Have I missed something? I thought that six former NoW journalists are currently being trialled for conspiracy to hack mobile phones and that several MPs did go to prison over false expenses claims.

Missed maybe not, understated more like, Several MP's? How many fiddled, and skimming through wiki regarding the expenses I'd say geordiecpl's comment 'Instead, in both cases, the blame was placed upon the systems and the institutions instead of indiviuals.' is pretty much spot on.

and further reading through Baroness Uddin's wiki entry and her 120k + expenses scandal and not a prison sentence in sight, yeah perhaps you did miss geordiecpls point.

There has been at least one journalist already sent to prison for phone hacking and another 6 are currently on trial. I'd say that this was the individuals being blamed, although The newspaper industry should certainly shoulder it's share of responsibility for allowing such practices. With regards to MPs expenses, the institution may well have been blamed rather than the individuals as it was the institution that actively encouraged MPs to claim in the manner they did although the MPs that were convicted of fraud were sent to prison.
Quote by Geordiecpl2001
... and if the press had kept their noses clean by not hacking Millie Dowler's mobile (and other such diabolical things) perhaps there would not have been a need for Leveson or ultimately Maria Millar to steer legislation through Parliament to control their actions rolleyes

The printed media is out of control and has a self-belief that it is there to dish it out but not receive it. So when Leveson hung all their dirty washing out in public, and they failed to drag any Ministers in the process they just said 'Sod You' when Parliament (who we elect) told them how they would be regulated. And years later there is STILL no regulation. So Maria Miller was fair game as they knew there would be no comeback.
The answer is simple. Just stop buying newspapers, they go bust and its sorted.
What the hackers did was against the law !! A prosecution against the individuals who did it, with sufficiently long prison sentences as a warning to others would probably have solved that whole problem. The same principle could have been applied to MPs who claimed expenses to which they were not entitled.
Instead, in both cases, the blame was placed upon the systems and the institutions instead of indiviuals.
John
Have I missed something? I thought that six former NoW journalists are currently being trialled for conspiracy to hack mobile phones and that several MPs did go to prison over false expenses claims.
Quote by gulsonroad30664
Thought we'd lost that broken record
:bs::bs:

Old Communists don't die they just fade away on to SH.
I guess we should be grateful Margaret Thatcher wasn't mentioned and blamed for all our woes .. lol
margret thatcher was a puppet for the city of london. deregulation and the big bang comes to mind.
communist, socialist or collectivist ? so independent critical thought should be stigmatised in order to negate any real content. well i've been called a few things a lot worse but i would prefer if you and max would challenge the validity of the content
That's really rich coming from you. I've challenged you to substantiate all of the bull shit you spout on here and everytime my challenge has been met with a resounding silence!
Quote by MidsCouple24
And people say I took crap :sad:

Gulson's a one trick pony. Posts the same thing over and over again and never responds when asked to substantiate his claims.
Quote by Chish
....the iranians are building nuclear weapons to bomb the democratic good free nation of Israel? dirty rotten terrorists (in this period muslims)are hidding under your bed...fear fear, you gotta be afraid...all muslims are potential bin liners....now its the russians that are the baddies. wake up and join up the dots...................ivan is the new baddie

So its wrong for Iran to obtain Nuclear weapons but its perfectly OK for Israel to have them? Why should either have them? Neither needs them. But if you allow Israel to have WMD then don't be surprised if other nations also feel the need. And Iran, Jordan, Turkey and many other nations in the Middle East are also "democratic good free nations"
But then you are clearly of the American opinion that all 'Mussies' are basically evil and Israel can do no wrong ...
You really need to read all of Gulson's posts!
Quote by MidsCouple24
Happy to listen to other peoples better ideas to combat terrorism lol
Anyone can knock and idea, intelligence is to come up with a better solution wink
Locking up anyone who doesn't fit could be preferable to killing anyone who doesn't fit

One doesn't have to knock your 'idea' it stands there as a monument to your stupidity. In this instance, intelligence is not to be drawn into a puerile debate, so as the Dragons would say 'I'm out!'
Quote by MidsCouple24
I fully agree with you, it is a terrible thing to do, but what do you think we should do ?
How do we fight terrorism ?
What do we do about the facilities that exist to transform innocent men and women into terrorists willing to maim and kill other innocents and to die doing it, a number of the recent terrorists have as we all know been converted to Islam, nothing wrong with that but at the same time they have been converted to terrorists.
I don't think we need to return to killing witches since I am not aware of any witches killing thousands of innocent people at the moment.

Your idea is just so stupid, there really is no point in debating this. As I asked before, do you really believe the rubbish you write or are you just trying to provoke a reaction?
Quote by MidsCouple24
I believe that in most cases the family are totally innocent, in some cases they are innocent and have no knowledge of what their family member is planning, some do not know but suspect it or do little to prevent what might happen, in some cases they condone their actions afterwards albeit in a somewhat veiled manner, some condemn what they have done, but to protect the innocents some innocents are going to have to suffer, that is the nature of terrorism.
All family members.
I know how abhorrent such action is to some, I despise internment myself but I feel that the acts of terrorism are worse, we interned people who might be a threat during WWII and in the H Blocks of NI in the 70s. It is impossible to say if this had any effect but no action certainly has an effect.
And before anyone asks "what other crimes should this be extended to, jail a drug dealers family etc, of course not, my proposal is extreme to deal with an extreme situation, hundreds of terrorist attacks have been foiled, some have taken place, we live with the effects of terrorism every day of our lives and I believe that the situation will only get worse.

Do you really believe the rubbish you write?
Quote by MidsCouple24
When a person has been convicted of a crime of terrorism or died committing an act of terrorism their family is charged with being related to that person and sentenced to interment, of course they can apply to leave the United Kingdom to live somewhere that they feel they would be happier and of course if they can find somewhere willing to accept them, of course being being UK citizens or residing here under EU rules no EU country can refuse them entry.

Do you mean immediate family or wider family and what if the family are completely innocent
and had no knowledge of the terrorist acts supposedly carried out by their family member?
Quote by MidsCouple24
When a person has been convicted of a crime of terrorism or died committing an act of terrorism their family is charged with being related to that person and sentenced to interment, of course they can apply to leave the United Kingdom to live somewhere that they feel they would be happier and of course if they can find somewhere willing to accept them, of course being being UK citizens or residing here under EU rules no EU country can refuse them entry.

Do you mean immediate family or wider family and what if the family are completely innocent
and had no knowledge of the terrorist acts supposedly carried out by their family member?
Quote by MidsCouple24
It is simple, we pass a law that says it is illegal to be related to a terrorist.....

Please explain how this might work.
Quote by MidsCouple24
The situation in the Ukraine could be one for the future of many Nations including the United Kingdom.
The Ukraine is a Nation where many of the citizens have an allegiance to Russia, many see themselves as Russians living in the Ukraine and some see themselves as Russians living in a part of Russia called the Ukraine.
Whilst I have always supported and continue to support immigration and believe it is necessary for the prosperity of the United Kingdom we have a similar situation but even more diversified.
We have citizens in the UK who see themselves primarily of another Nationality living in the UK, Indians, Pakistanis, Romanians, Afghans, Iraqis and so on. Whilst many of them were born in the UK they still have a strong allegiance to the Nation of their hereditary.
The Ukraine is facing a civil war, in the United Kingdom we have another factor, religion here has a greater impact on the loyalty of the citizens here.
I believe we could benefit from ALL citizens of the UK swearing an allegiance to the UK as part of our acceptance to residing here as citizens and the entitlement to a United Kingdom/EU Passport. Why should we issue a Passport to someone who is unwilling to swear their allegiance to the Nation that they expect to protect them at home and when travelling abroad, the Nation who will house them and support them and provide medical facilities should they need them.
As a former soldier I have sworn my allegiance to Crown and Country, I would be happy to do so again as a civilian.
Thoughts .................

It could well result in many swearing allegiances without any true conviction. Not sure what would be gained from that!
Quote by MidsCouple24
And now, the end is near, and we must face the final curtain, and through it all, I can say, they did it Moyes way.
So short of 2 miracles no Manchester United in Europe next season, and even Arsenal could be relegated to the lower European League.
Got the top premiership places right, Liverpool did surprise me and though contenders my money is still on City for the top spot then Chelsea then Liverpool.
United managed to stop the rot too late, their away record saving them from further embarrassment with the best record this season, strange how they can do so well away from home and fail at Old Trafford.
Arsenal, well I said I thought Wenga had reached his peak a long time ago and some embarrassing defeats have shown that to be true.
I think it will go to the final game but look what City did to United in the final game 2 seasons ago, down and out with minutes to go and they fought like tigers to take the title in the last gasps of the game.
If I were a Chelsea fan I would not like the way my manager kept saying we had no chance of winning the taking the league title off City, modesty is one thing, but defeatism is never a good tactic.
All in all it has been a good season for the Premiership with no major screamers like the Suarez incident but again so many foreign players that the English team will continue to suffer from a lack of players gaining experience playing together or in top flight games.

You got Manchester City and Chelsea correct. Only an idiot would have predicted that those two teams would not finish in the top 4 and if you think that Mourinho's mutterings are defeatism, you really haven't a clue as to what you're talking about.
I am a born n bred United fan, Sir Alex, love him or hate him was a Master of gameplay, I understand that what he is doing is gamesmanship, but not everyone does I don't think that this is the best tactic from one so clever, true if you fail you can say "well I said it was going to be very difficult" succeed and you can claim how much your team have achieved against the odds, but it is not what many fans want to hear from their leader, the same goes for the players, no matter what he says in the dressing room to the contrary he is intentionally or not instilling a little doubt in the backs of minds.
You have to believe in yourselves 100% at all times and especially when up against the odds.

As I said, not a clue.
Quote by MidsCouple24
And now, the end is near, and we must face the final curtain, and through it all, I can say, they did it Moyes way.
So short of 2 miracles no Manchester United in Europe next season, and even Arsenal could be relegated to the lower European League.
Got the top premiership places right, Liverpool did surprise me and though contenders my money is still on City for the top spot then Chelsea then Liverpool.
United managed to stop the rot too late, their away record saving them from further embarrassment with the best record this season, strange how they can do so well away from home and fail at Old Trafford.
Arsenal, well I said I thought Wenga had reached his peak a long time ago and some embarrassing defeats have shown that to be true.
I think it will go to the final game but look what City did to United in the final game 2 seasons ago, down and out with minutes to go and they fought like tigers to take the title in the last gasps of the game.
If I were a Chelsea fan I would not like the way my manager kept saying we had no chance of winning the taking the league title off City, modesty is one thing, but defeatism is never a good tactic.
All in all it has been a good season for the Premiership with no major screamers like the Suarez incident but again so many foreign players that the English team will continue to suffer from a lack of players gaining experience playing together or in top flight games.

You got Manchester City and Chelsea correct. Only an idiot would have predicted that those two teams would not finish in the top 4 and if you think that Mourinho's mutterings are defeatism, you really haven't a clue as to what you're talking about.
Quote by MidsCouple24
So I finally got the job done a few weeks ago, I found a builder who agreed to do the job for the price I had been quoted by other builders ie £260
On the due date 2 guys arrived at 9am as agreed and worked like Trojans to get the job done and dusted by 6pm. Well perhaps not dusted, removal of a double brick wall does bring about a lot of dust.
Workrate .... excellent
Plastering .. excellent
Lintel/RSJ .. excellent
Overall satisfaction .. excellent
So did I finally find a local builder using all the standard methods of newspapers, recommended tradesman sites, the internet in general
Nah, I found him of elsewhere and he lives in Chesterfield 2 hours from Stoke on Trent.

You've already told us this on 25th Feb. it's even less interesting 2nd time around.
Quote by Toots
Snip.......
NAO say on the sale

This is what the NAO actually said.
Who's waffling and who are the Cameron/Clegg/Cable apologists? Certainly not me!
As for your accusations of people being blinkered, remember that when you are pointing at someone, 3 of your fingers are pointing right back at you.
You don't seem to want to accept that the priority investors were in the main pension funds. The Government wanted some long term holding of the shares for stability. The fact that quite a few of these priority investors have sold their shares suggests to me that they believe the share price has peaked and the sensible thing to do was maximise their investment. The beneficiaries of this will be members of the various pension funds, hopefully people like you and me.
The shares sold to the private investors were limited to £750 per person, presumably to stop wealthy individuals buying thousands of shares at the issue price.
In time it may well be deemed that the issue price was undervalued but as I said earlier, we can all be right with the benefit of hindsight.