when is a reminder not a reminder?

I went to the Post Office this lunch time to renew the SORN declaration on a vehicle. As I don't have the reminder letter I took my V5c document along with me to identify the vehicle that needed the declaration. I know from past experience that this is enough if you wish to purchase a tax disk.

I could not believe it when I was informed that I could only declare my vehicle SORN if I had the reminder letter. The letter that they send out to remind you to tax your car. Fortunately I managed to complete the process online only using the information on the V5c document.

So if you want to go to the Post Office in person and declare a vehicle offroad then the reminder is not a reminder at all - it's a critical part of the required paperwork.


Which is utterly fucking insane.

nyan chesus

Learn more about this project

word verification

Yes I've just noticed the new 'captcha' pile of shit word verification too. You've got to love Google's attitude - if it's working quite well lets change it and fuck it up for no real reason.

Not sure yet what I'm going to do about it.

Elite Carpet Cleaning

We've reached the end of the 6 month lease on the house and are both moving out. As part of the contract we agreed to get the carpets professionally cleaned as my house-mate had a cat. No problem we thought and when Groupon advertised a bargain service for two rooms and a staircase, which is precisely the amount of carpet in the house, the timing was perfect and the discounted price good.

Then it all went horribly wrong. Elite Carpet Cleaning took the booking a fortnight ago and were supposed to turn up at 10am today. At half ten I phoned them to be told they wouldn't be coming but could reschedule for two weeks time. I move out of the house of Saturday.

The fucking wankstain cunttards couldn't even be bothered to contact us to tell us they couldn't make the appointment.

A couple of people I know have, it turns out, also had trouble with them. I can't see them surviving much longer with that kind of (lack of) customer service. If you, or someone you know, are thinking of booking them don't. They're unlikely to turn up and it's a waste of your time and money.

rape trail

I know that spellcheck said it was correct but ........

more dangreous than smoking!

Being lonely.

So after they've decimated the pubs, made us afraid of each other, encouraged us to be isolated they're now telling us this is more likely to make us die young than if we smoke?

Cunts

Caroline Lucas

Ms Lucas unveils a three point plan to reduce fuel poverty in today's Independent. Her three simple and sensible solutions are

First, we are calling on the Government to impose a similar levy to the one it has imposed on North Sea oil companies and the big banks. Over time, such a levy could raise billions, revenues that could be ring-fenced and used to ensure that every home is insulated and highly energy-efficient – starting with the homes of the fuel-poor. This would form part of a Green New Deal and would help to create thousands of new skilled jobs.

Impose a new tax

Second, to prevent energy companies from passing the cost of any levy on to customers, we want the Government to give Ofgem the power to cap prices. This could be linked to the wholesale price to make energy prices fairer.

Skew the market

Third, we want the Government to launch a public inquiry into the Big Six energy companies. The industry has a huge problem in terms of trust, and it is in the interests of energy suppliers themselves that these issues be addressed. We then need to devise appropriate reforms that ensure we have a market and an industry that serve people and planet before profit.

Impose more bureaucracy for the energy companies and skew the energy market further.

It just shows what a fucking nutter she is. Simpler and more sensible solutions to reducing fuel poverty would be

1. remove VAT on fuel
2. remove the environmental levy from fuel

In a stroke my solutions would reduce the price of fuel and reduce the cost of government rather than piling on more taxes and interfering with the market. A much simpler solution I trust you'll agree?

out of sight, out of their minds

I stopped to buy cigarettes at Tesco in between sales calls today and this sight greeted me. I nervously asked the assistant if they had any Lucky Strikes and she had to look behind all of the doors until she found them. Maybe that part is deliberate? Making the process slower for customers will make them so annoyed that they want to stop smoking? To negate this wait multiplying over many shopping trips I bought loads instead.

It's begun in the supermarkets but by 2015 ALL shops will have to do this. Remember children nanny state knows best when it comes to these things. It is for your own good after all and probably going to hurt them much more than it hurts you.

six point five percent

The problem for nucking futters is their numbers. Take Tam Fry of the national obesity forum. The Mirror, now deciding he's male, has a piece about how to feed babies. Tam Fry is quoted as saying

"It is important they experience all five food groups and experiment with variety as much as possible. If half of it finishes on the floor, so be it - the value of experimentation in the early months of nutrition is incalculable and babies won’t willingly starve themselves. If this also has the advantage of reducing unhealthy weight gain and avoiding obesity, it’s a win-win for mums.”

So mums after you've cleaned up the mess (win-win?) does one of you want to explain to Tam misogynist Fry why wasting 50% of the food is a bad idea? Maybe the taxpayer funded WRAP campaign LoveFoodHateWaste might give him a clue? Two taxpayer funded bodies offering seemingly opposing attitudes towards a given subject. We could save ourselves a whole load of money by having neither ........ Anyway, back to the article where

The sample included 92 children who had been weaned on finger foods and 63 who were traditionally spoon-fed.

I was thinking why is the 'finger food' group 50% larger than the weaned group? Is one type of parent more likely to respond to this kind of survey than another? And then I read a bit of the study. Each group was recruited using different methods; one from adverts on the internet and one hand picked by the researchers which will have a bearing on the attitude of the person completing the study. Which isn't about kids eating and weight but about the parent's attitude towards their children's eating habits

Parents filled in questionnaires on how their children had been weaned, including how often they ate certain foods, when they were aged six months and six years.

I can't remember what my kids ate a month ago, let alone when they were six months old so I might guess a little to make myself look and feel good

They noted their child’s preference for 151 foods broken down into categories such as carbohydrates, proteins, fruit, savoury snacks, dairy and “whole meals” such as lasagne.

I, as a parent, have to guess whether my 6 month old child likes fruit more than bread so that some busybody cunt can get in the media telling me that I've made my kids fat? No thanks. Especially as the study has this to say about baby-led feeding

The baby-led approach was, however, associated with a higher incidence of underweight relative to the spoon-fed group.

"a higher incidence of underweight" may lead to a higher incidence of other developmental issues. Tam doesn't mention this rather crucial part of the discussion from the paper. Instead, if you remember from above, he calls it "reducing unhealthy weight gain".

The Mirror leaves the best statistic until the end though.

Nearly all - 94% - of youngsters had never choked as a result of being given solid foods.

6.5% of parents reported that their progeny had choked on solid foods. SIX AND A HALF PERCENT! Normally we're told that chiiiildren can't be exposed to that amount of risk! Tam Fry is clearly a menace as he's advocating dangerous practices that could leave your child malnutritioned or, in some cases, dead.

smoking kids

You can download this poster from the British Lung Foundation. Yet another example of an image that had it been produced by a tobacco company would be illegal but, because it's been released by the anti-tobacco brigade is perfectly acceptable.

For reference the British Lung Foundation receives funds from the NHS, Pfizer, and Glaxo as indicated by their accounts.

a quick note to fiona macrae

Dear Fiona,

In your piece on the evils of sugar in the Daily Mail you write

The damage done mirrors the effects of drinking too much alcohol – which the scientists point out is made from distilling sugar.

Clearly you haven't got the first fucking clue about how alcohol is produced. If I were you I'd do a little research before allowing my name to be associated with such utter bollocks.

For your reference alcohol is a by-product of yeast respiration in anaerobic or low oxygen conditions. Yeasts convert the sugars to alcohol, CO2, and energy on the mitochondria within the cell structure.

Maybe you should take the time to verify the other claims made by the anti-sugar nutcases before regurgitating them as this one is provably incorrect?

Thanks

manwiddicombe