For help, advice and discussion about stuff not related to aviation. Play nice: no religion, no politics and no axe grinding please.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
User avatar
By eltonioni
#1873004
nallen wrote:
Rob P wrote:All very well, but where is dog licencing run from?


(cough) licensing

Oh don't :lol: I stopped bothering with that one after the umpteenth encounter with the wayward spoil chicken. Pedent's be dammed,
#1873010
Rob P wrote:All very well, but where is dog licencing run from?

And I know it isn't Barking. :naughty:

Rob P


You are good to go unless you move to Northern Ireland. Then you need a licence that costs £12.50. Being over 65 you actually are exempt from this fee, although you have to pay a fee of £5 for each and every subsequent dog. If you had been under 65 you could still get the £5 concession if the dog is sterilised, but you may be asked to get a certificate from a vet to prove it.

I call that Barking. :wink:

https://www.nidirect.gov.uk/articles/do ... ping#toc-3
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1873011
As I said earlier, try the DVLA complaints department and if that proves difficult, try the DVLA complaints department via your MP, worked a treat for me and I'm OK until I'm 76 now.
User avatar
By eltonioni
#1873013
johnm wrote:As I said earlier, try the DVLA complaints department and if that proves difficult, try the DVLA complaints department via your MP, worked a treat for me and I'm OK until I'm 76 now.

Was this recently John?
By Highland Park
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1873014
Paultheparaglider wrote:
eltonioni wrote:Pedent's be dammed,


I would have been more impressed if you hadn't capitalised the p and had used the insect spelling.


[PEDANT mode on]
…and even more impressed had “Pedent’s” and “dammed” (sic) been spelled correctly (I have no
idea what “insect spelling” is…) :lol: :lol:

[Pedant mode off]
User avatar
By Rob P
#1873016
Latin

pedent

third-person plural present active subjunctive of pedō


Rob P
eltonioni liked this
User avatar
By kanga
#1873044
TravellerBob wrote:.. If not there's no petrol* so ..

* not a fact; a bbc lie.


citation link, please ..

[I have seen no BBC reports saying this. I have seen BBC reports quoting the industry and Ministers saying there is plenty of petrol, and there is no need to panic buy; alongside reports of filling stations running out of petrol because people are panic buying. AFAIK, these reports on both themes have been accurate. Happy to be corrected.

Meanwhile, I have seen (on BBC news site's daily reproduction of the front pages of the national newspapers) front pages of some of the tabloids blaring headlines suggesting that there is no petrol, accompanied by pictures nof queues or frustrated motorists, unmitigated by the industry and Ministerial reassurances. Some of those headlines and pictures have been, IMHO, actually mendacious]
townleyc, Flyin'Dutch' liked this
By TravellerBob
#1873092
kanga wrote:
TravellerBob wrote:.. If not there's no petrol* so ..

* not a fact; a bbc lie.


citation link, please ..

They are wise not to outright say things demonstrably untrue, however they ensure the story about "fuel crisis" is a lead on their web and TV output and the rest is simply dumb people.

Every other industry has a duty of care to it's users, but the bbc just don't give a damn about direct or indirect effects or impacts of their stories, hiding behind an anachronistic wail about "freedom of the press" which had some merit when Kings ruled the land and none now.

Even their "apologise weekly" show shoehorned into one of the mainly unwatched weekend news broadcasts is the bbc telling the complainers they're wrong and the bbc are right.

Anyways, this isn't about the the biased bbc, it's about the inept Welsh healthcare system holding English drivers to ransom thanks to muddled decentralisation and muddled devolved responsibilities driven by a previous muddled government. :thumleft:
User avatar
By kanga
#1873101
TravellerBob wrote:
kanga wrote:
TravellerBob wrote:.. If not there's no petrol* so ..

* not a fact; a bbc lie.


citation link, please ..


They are wise not to outright say things demonstrably untrue, however they ensure the story about "fuel crisis" is a lead on their web and TV output and the rest is simply dumb people.

Every other industry has a duty of care to it's users, but the bbc just don't give a damn about direct or indirect effects or impacts of their stories,..

Anyways, this isn't about the the biased bbc, ..


.. except that it was raised, and not by me ..

Ah, so the complaint is now not that there was a 'lie', but (my gist if I understand it) is that BBC bulletins led on the same domestic story as led every other UK TV, radio, and web news bulletin (although the BBC presentation was both more accurate, complete and nuanced than many of those others), because it (but not those others ?) might induce foolish people to behave foolishly, so the BBC (alone ?) should have suppressed or downplayed the story .. and this is somehow evidence of 'bias' ..

[Since it has been suggested: 'They are wise not to outright say things demonstrably untrue,' .. I do not recall BBC news (at least since the Hutton report) - TV, radio or online - ever offering anything untrue without (on those very rare occasions) swiftly issuing a correction or clarification, or by adding a caveat about 'unverified sources' eg of amateur-shot footage. This is far from true of many other UK news sources, which is one reason why Sky (say) often appears to 'scoop' the BBC by getting a new story or development out first, running the risk and regularly being guilty of inaccuracies. Obviously, some people may find accurate news unwelcome, or believe that an unwelcome editorial choice of one story or aspect of it over another (however accurate) represents some bias; but to suggest deliberate mendacity seems to me to be a calumny. Other Forumites may, of course, disagree :roll: ]
johnm liked this
#1873120
kanga wrote:...the complaint is now ...

The point is that there was no story.

No need for "journalists" to be camped-out at petrol stations. There wasn't a problem until the bbc and others started saying there was.

The duty of care to their users includes not creating self-fulfilling prophesies and they failed in that duty.

Just because Sky, ITV et al. are rubbish doesn't excuse the bbc, or grant them exemption from being judged for broadcasting rubbish.
Aerials liked this
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1873123
One practical issue in relation to DVLA and licensing that I discovered in my saga. Although you can do a number of things apparently on line, the data is collected but the processing is done by humans on paper and with computers being used to record their work.

It's pretty much impossible for them to work from home and social distancing in the office means that productivity has gone from bad to awful.

Outfits like DVLA were set up where they are specifically to provide employment, so there has been no incentive to move from paper to computers......
Milty liked this
User avatar
By kanga
#1873152
TravellerBob wrote:
kanga wrote:...the complaint is now ...

The point is that there was no story. ..


I rather think there was a story which needing reporting but..

TravellerBob wrote:
..No need for "journalists" to be camped-out at petrol stations. ..



.. with that I agree ..

TravellerBob wrote:
There wasn't a problem until the bbc and others started saying there was...



Others may well be better informed than I am. I have no reason to doubt that shortage of HGV drivers (widely reported in other contexts) did leave to some filling stations not getting the deliveries which they had been expecting, that this happened in more than one part of the country, and that such reports from more than one area reached national newsrooms, and that therefore editors reckoned that a wider (I do not know how initially widespread) problem was emerging. IMHO it was proper to report this, and the BBC reporting in various media was actually more responsible (because they took the trouble to consult the industry and Ministers to determine the actual scale of the problem) than many of the other actors in all media.

TravellerBob wrote:
.. Just because Sky, ITV et al. are rubbish doesn't excuse the bbc, or grant them exemption from being judged for broadcasting rubbish.


quite, but I do not accept that the BBC reporting was 'rubbish', just because foolish people reacted foolishly, even if that was also predictable. Obviously, again, other Forumites may disagree :roll:
By TravellerBob
#1873164
It's great you defend the indefensible policies of the bbc without question.

Truly it is.

Because for every true zealot believer you turn 100 people who were agnostic about bbc excesses, bias and narrative, into 100 more who want it shut down.

Who won't pay the bbc tax anymore.

Who won't defend its "unique way of funding".

So more power to your elbow.

Game on.
-------------------
Now, let's get back to the Welsh Government's failure to provide a sensible plan to enable a decentralised service, DVLA, to function.

I get it doesn't affect Wales much because there are only a few people there, but that's not the point.

England funds their other silly signs-in-sing-song-language folly so it's quid pro quo.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8