In message , writes
In article ,
chris French wrote:
In message , Jake
writes

I'm particularly careful with electricians these days. I've rewired
two houses in the past, getting my work passed by the tester who had
to connect the tails to the meter, but am now "incapable" of doing
anything serious because of "Part P" regulations. When I had a new
kitchen fitted at home I got a "Part P" qualified fitter do the
electrical work. Subsequently, having identified problems (which I
couldn't correct as I'm not Part P qualified), I got another
electrician to put the botch job right (and got the first electrician
to pay).

That's not correct.

You can do 'Part P' notifiable works, you just need to put in a building
regs application for them.

For which you will be charged on the order of 250 pounds. Per job.


True, but if you are doing a big enough job, then cost wise it's still
worth it. And you don't have to then employ an electrician to not do the
job properly .
--
Chris French

On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 09:29:52 +0000, chris French
wrote:

In message , writes
In article ,
chris French wrote:
In message , Jake
writes

I'm particularly careful with electricians these days. I've rewired
two houses in the past, getting my work passed by the tester who had
to connect the tails to the meter, but am now "incapable" of doing
anything serious because of "Part P" regulations. When I had a new
kitchen fitted at home I got a "Part P" qualified fitter do the
electrical work. Subsequently, having identified problems (which I
couldn't correct as I'm not Part P qualified), I got another
electrician to put the botch job right (and got the first electrician
to pay).

That's not correct.

You can do 'Part P' notifiable works, you just need to put in a building
regs application for them.

For which you will be charged on the order of 250 pounds. Per job.


True, but if you are doing a big enough job, then cost wise it's still
worth it. And you don't have to then employ an electrician to not do the
job properly .

I've spent years living and breathing all the different building regs
- "Doc M", "Part P" and so on, and often thinking they are daft.
Technically, I can wire up an office building badly and potentially
kill lots of people but I cannot wire up my own home badly and just
kill myself.

A lot of wiring work, done properly, is hidden behind walls. I have
known cases of people doing the job themselves and then asking an
electrician to certify the work (complies fully with Part P) but the
electrician says he has to check everything and ends up charging as
much as he would have charged to do the job in the first place and
leaves more mess! Part P is a real rip-off in my view and doesn't
really achieve anything.

In my case, I didn't have time to go through the notice procedure with
Building Control and, in any event, had I corrected the botch job
myself the original sparkie would have got away with a lot. Getting
another electrician to do the work meant I had an invoice with which
to make the original idiot pay up (and another electrician to report
back to NICEIC on the first and, hopefully, prevent any future botch
jobs).

Hi Sacha,
Re Monty, Its not what you say about yourself that counts!!!


uriel13

"Janet" wrote in message
...
In article , says...

On 2010-12-16 01:12:58 +0000, uriel13
said:
Hi Sacha,
Re Monty, Its not what you say about yourself that
counts!!!



uriel13

I think your opinion would carry some weight - perhaps - if you weren't
so obviously here only to troll and bash one person.

Google shows Uriel 13 has been posting on-topic gardening posts to urg
for at least a year. S/he is clearly not a troll or here to bash anyone.

Perhaps, Sacha, your own opinions would carry more weight if you would
drop the endless paranoid smears and dismissal of other posters
legitimate contributions.

Janet

Paranoid? That's a bit loud isn't it?

Mike


--

....................................
Today, is the tomorrow, you were worrying about, yesterday.
....................................

"Janet" wrote in message
...
In article , says...

On 2010-12-16 13:45:28 +0000, Janet said:

In article , says...

On 2010-12-16 01:12:58 +0000, uriel13
said:
Hi Sacha,
Re Monty, Its not what you say about yourself that
counts!!!
uriel13

I think your opinion would carry some weight - perhaps - if you
weren't
so obviously here only to troll and bash one person.

Google shows Uriel 13 has been posting on-topic gardening posts to urg
for at least a year. S/he is clearly not a troll or here to bash
anyone.

Perhaps, Sacha, your own opinions would carry more weight if you
would
drop the endless paranoid smears and dismissal of other posters
legitimate contributions.

Janet



I will second that from her killfiled list !

Regards
Pete - quite couth actually

"Sacha" wrote in message
...
On 2010-12-16 14:51:52 +0000, Janet said:

In article , says...

On 2010-12-16 13:45:28 +0000, Janet said:

In article , says...

On 2010-12-16 01:12:58 +0000, uriel13
said:
Hi Sacha,
Re Monty, Its not what you say about yourself that
counts!!!
uriel13

I think your opinion would carry some weight - perhaps - if you
weren't
so obviously here only to troll and bash one person.

Google shows Uriel 13 has been posting on-topic gardening posts to urg
for at least a year. S/he is clearly not a troll or here to bash
anyone.

Perhaps, Sacha, your own opinions would carry more weight if you would
drop the endless paranoid smears and dismissal of other posters
legitimate contributions.

Janet

Really Janet, coming from you, that last paragraph is truly hilarious.
Uriel had a clear agenda in bashing Monty Don in an unproven and
spiteful way.

That is an obvious lie. Uriels post did no such thing. He referenced
the previous discussion about Monty; and made a generalisation
applicable to all. That self-recommendation is not what counts. Oh.. and
s/he addressed that observation to you, by name.

Janet

Janet, you have now tried to pick fights with me on 3 different groups,
throwing insult and abuse around. Your behaviour is just appalling. This
has nothing to do with urg, Uriel or anything other than your fury that I
won't play your filthy games with other peoples' lives and said so a long
time ago. That's it lady, into the bozo bin with you, too.

--
Sacha



Write to her family ;-))

--

....................................
Today, is the tomorrow, you were worrying about, yesterday.
....................................

"'Mike'" wrote in message
...

"Sacha" wrote in message
...
On 2010-12-16 14:51:52 +0000, Janet said:

In article , says...

On 2010-12-16 13:45:28 +0000, Janet said:

In article ,
says...

On 2010-12-16 01:12:58 +0000, uriel13
said:
Hi Sacha,
Re Monty, Its not what you say about yourself that
counts!!!
uriel13

I think your opinion would carry some weight - perhaps - if you
weren't
so obviously here only to troll and bash one person.

Google shows Uriel 13 has been posting on-topic gardening posts to urg
for at least a year. S/he is clearly not a troll or here to bash
anyone.

Perhaps, Sacha, your own opinions would carry more weight if you would
drop the endless paranoid smears and dismissal of other posters
legitimate contributions.

Janet

Really Janet, coming from you, that last paragraph is truly hilarious.
Uriel had a clear agenda in bashing Monty Don in an unproven and
spiteful way.

That is an obvious lie. Uriels post did no such thing. He referenced
the previous discussion about Monty; and made a generalisation
applicable to all. That self-recommendation is not what counts. Oh.. and
s/he addressed that observation to you, by name.

Janet

Janet, you have now tried to pick fights with me on 3 different groups,
throwing insult and abuse around. Your behaviour is just appalling. This
has nothing to do with urg, Uriel or anything other than your fury that I
won't play your filthy games with other peoples' lives and said so a long
time ago. That's it lady, into the bozo bin with you, too.

Welcome - it is not so bad here - at least you are free from her ladyships
replies(:-)

Pete

"'Mike'" wrote in message
...

"Sacha" wrote in message
...
On 2010-12-16 14:51:52 +0000, Janet said:

In article , says...

On 2010-12-16 13:45:28 +0000, Janet said:

In article ,
says...

On 2010-12-16 01:12:58 +0000, uriel13
said:
Hi Sacha,
Re Monty, Its not what you say about yourself that
counts!!!
uriel13

I think your opinion would carry some weight - perhaps - if you
weren't
so obviously here only to troll and bash one person.

Google shows Uriel 13 has been posting on-topic gardening posts to urg
for at least a year. S/he is clearly not a troll or here to bash
anyone.

Perhaps, Sacha, your own opinions would carry more weight if you would
drop the endless paranoid smears and dismissal of other posters
legitimate contributions.

Janet

Really Janet, coming from you, that last paragraph is truly hilarious.
Uriel had a clear agenda in bashing Monty Don in an unproven and
spiteful way.

That is an obvious lie. Uriels post did no such thing. He referenced
the previous discussion about Monty; and made a generalisation
applicable to all. That self-recommendation is not what counts. Oh.. and
s/he addressed that observation to you, by name.

Janet

Janet, you have now tried to pick fights with me on 3 different groups,
throwing insult and abuse around. Your behaviour is just appalling. This
has nothing to do with urg, Uriel or anything other than your fury that I
won't play your filthy games with other peoples' lives and said so a long
time ago. That's it lady, into the bozo bin with you, too.

--
Sacha



Write to her family ;-))

:-))

Care - you could be next in line for her bin !

But --
Thanks anyway

Pete

"Pete" wrote in message
...


"'Mike'" wrote in message
...

"Sacha" wrote in message
...
On 2010-12-16 14:51:52 +0000, Janet said:

In article , says...

On 2010-12-16 13:45:28 +0000, Janet said:

In article ,
says...

On 2010-12-16 01:12:58 +0000, uriel13
said:
Hi Sacha,
Re Monty, Its not what you say about yourself that
counts!!!
uriel13

I think your opinion would carry some weight - perhaps - if you
weren't
so obviously here only to troll and bash one person.

Google shows Uriel 13 has been posting on-topic gardening posts to
urg
for at least a year. S/he is clearly not a troll or here to bash
anyone.

Perhaps, Sacha, your own opinions would carry more weight if you
would
drop the endless paranoid smears and dismissal of other posters
legitimate contributions.

Janet

Really Janet, coming from you, that last paragraph is truly hilarious.
Uriel had a clear agenda in bashing Monty Don in an unproven and
spiteful way.

That is an obvious lie. Uriels post did no such thing. He referenced
the previous discussion about Monty; and made a generalisation
applicable to all. That self-recommendation is not what counts. Oh..
and
s/he addressed that observation to you, by name.

Janet

Janet, you have now tried to pick fights with me on 3 different groups,
throwing insult and abuse around. Your behaviour is just appalling.
This has nothing to do with urg, Uriel or anything other than your fury
that I won't play your filthy games with other peoples' lives and said
so a long time ago. That's it lady, into the bozo bin with you, too.

--
Sacha



Write to her family ;-))

:-))

Care - you could be next in line for her bin !

But --
Thanks anyway

Pete



""Stupid boy""

I'm already in it. DOOOO keep up ;-)

Actually, she doesn't have a bin. She likes to 'keep and eye and control'
over her newsgroup.

(I won't tell you what my family think of her superiority complex, but are
waiting for 'a letter' to turn up ;-))

Very serious question. 'Just why do some people think they are so superior
to others?'

Mike

ps

Pete, to show what I mean about there not being a bin, her 'ladyship' will
respond, not direct, but via another posting somewhere which shows that we
are all "read" if you see what I mean.



--

....................................
Today, is the tomorrow, you were worrying about, yesterday.
....................................

--

....................................
Today, is the tomorrow, you were worrying about, yesterday.
....................................




"'Mike'" wrote in message
...
"Pete" wrote in message
...


"'Mike'" wrote in message
...

"Sacha" wrote in message
...
On 2010-12-16 14:51:52 +0000, Janet said:

In article ,
says...

On 2010-12-16 13:45:28 +0000, Janet said:

In article ,
says...

On 2010-12-16 01:12:58 +0000, uriel13
said:
Hi Sacha,
Re Monty, Its not what you say about yourself that
counts!!!
uriel13

I think your opinion would carry some weight - perhaps - if you
weren't
so obviously here only to troll and bash one person.

Google shows Uriel 13 has been posting on-topic gardening posts to
urg
for at least a year. S/he is clearly not a troll or here to bash
anyone.

Perhaps, Sacha, your own opinions would carry more weight if you
would
drop the endless paranoid smears and dismissal of other posters
legitimate contributions.

Janet

Really Janet, coming from you, that last paragraph is truly
hilarious.
Uriel had a clear agenda in bashing Monty Don in an unproven and
spiteful way.

That is an obvious lie. Uriels post did no such thing. He referenced
the previous discussion about Monty; and made a generalisation
applicable to all. That self-recommendation is not what counts. Oh..
and
s/he addressed that observation to you, by name.

Janet

Janet, you have now tried to pick fights with me on 3 different groups,
throwing insult and abuse around. Your behaviour is just appalling.
This has nothing to do with urg, Uriel or anything other than your fury
that I won't play your filthy games with other peoples' lives and said
so a long time ago. That's it lady, into the bozo bin with you, too.

--
Sacha



Write to her family ;-))

:-))

Care - you could be next in line for her bin !

But --
Thanks anyway

Pete



""Stupid boy""

I'm already in it. DOOOO keep up ;-)

Actually, she doesn't have a bin. She likes to 'keep and eye and control'
over her newsgroup.

(I won't tell you what my family think of her superiority complex, but are
waiting for 'a letter' to turn up ;-))

Very serious question. 'Just why do some people think they are so superior
to others?'

Mike

ps

Pete, to show what I mean about there not being a bin, her 'ladyship' will
respond, not direct, but via another posting somewhere which shows that we
are all "read" if you see what I mean.




""How reassuring that you two have spoken up in defence of Janet. She's
certainly in the right company.""

Point set and match I believe :-))))))

Mike
--


--

....................................
Today, is the tomorrow, you were worrying about, yesterday.
....................................

Some of us admit to making mistakes

The following bit should have been deleted, but we are not all perfect.

...................................
Today, is the tomorrow, you were worrying about, yesterday.
...................................





Kindest regards

Mike

Top posting?
Not pruning?
In keeping with this newsgroup

(I will get round to 'public' emails later)

Merry Christmas and a hell of a Happy New Year to all who can read me
:-)))))))))))))))))))


"'Mike'" wrote in message
...
"Pete" wrote in message
...


"'Mike'" wrote in message
...

"Sacha" wrote in message
...
On 2010-12-16 14:51:52 +0000, Janet said:

In article ,
says...

On 2010-12-16 13:45:28 +0000, Janet said:

In article ,
says...

On 2010-12-16 01:12:58 +0000, uriel13
said:
Hi Sacha,
Re Monty, Its not what you say about yourself that
counts!!!
uriel13

I think your opinion would carry some weight - perhaps - if you
weren't
so obviously here only to troll and bash one person.

Google shows Uriel 13 has been posting on-topic gardening posts to
urg
for at least a year. S/he is clearly not a troll or here to bash
anyone.

Perhaps, Sacha, your own opinions would carry more weight if you
would
drop the endless paranoid smears and dismissal of other posters
legitimate contributions.

Janet

Really Janet, coming from you, that last paragraph is truly
hilarious.
Uriel had a clear agenda in bashing Monty Don in an unproven and
spiteful way.

That is an obvious lie. Uriels post did no such thing. He
referenced
the previous discussion about Monty; and made a generalisation
applicable to all. That self-recommendation is not what counts. Oh..
and
s/he addressed that observation to you, by name.

Janet

Janet, you have now tried to pick fights with me on 3 different
groups, throwing insult and abuse around. Your behaviour is just
appalling. This has nothing to do with urg, Uriel or anything other
than your fury that I won't play your filthy games with other peoples'
lives and said so a long time ago. That's it lady, into the bozo bin
with you, too.

--
Sacha



Write to her family ;-))

:-))

Care - you could be next in line for her bin !

But --
Thanks anyway

Pete



""Stupid boy""

I'm already in it. DOOOO keep up ;-)

Actually, she doesn't have a bin. She likes to 'keep and eye and control'
over her newsgroup.

(I won't tell you what my family think of her superiority complex, but
are waiting for 'a letter' to turn up ;-))

Very serious question. 'Just why do some people think they are so
superior to others?'

Mike

ps

Pete, to show what I mean about there not being a bin, her 'ladyship'
will respond, not direct, but via another posting somewhere which shows
that we are all "read" if you see what I mean.




""How reassuring that you two have spoken up in defence of Janet. She's
certainly in the right company.""

Point set and match I believe :-))))))

Mike
--


--

...................................
Today, is the tomorrow, you were worrying about, yesterday.
...................................

"Janet" wrote in message
...
In article , says...

On 2010-12-16 16:28:05 +0000, "Pete" said:
Care - you could be next in line for her bin !

But --
Thanks anyway

Pete


How reassuring that you two have spoken up in defence of Janet.

Well, Pete, that just about sums up Sacha's killfile.

Janet.


wot kill file???

:-))))))

""One does like to keep and eye on thing doesn't one?""


Mike

--

....................................
Today, is the tomorrow, you were worrying about, yesterday.
....................................

In message , Sacha
writes

Uriel had a clear agenda in bashing Monty Don in an unproven and
spiteful way.

I must have missed that edition of GW...
Is it on Eye Player?
--
Gordon H
Remove "invalid" to reply

In message , Sacha
writes
On 2010-12-16 16:28:05 +0000, "Pete" said:

"'Mike'" wrote in message
.. .
"Sacha" wrote in message
...
On 2010-12-16 14:51:52 +0000, Janet said:

In article ,
says...
On 2010-12-16 13:45:28 +0000, Janet said:

In article ,
says...
On 2010-12-16 01:12:58 +0000, uriel13
said:
Hi Sacha,
Re Monty, Its not what you say about yourself that
counts!!!
uriel13
I think your opinion would carry some weight - perhaps - if
weren't
so obviously here only to troll and bash one person.
Google shows Uriel 13 has been posting on-topic gardening posts
urg
for at least a year. S/he is clearly not a troll or here to bash anyone.
Perhaps, Sacha, your own opinions would carry more weight if
would
drop the endless paranoid smears and dismissal of other posters
legitimate contributions.
Janet
Really Janet, coming from you, that last paragraph is truly
hilarious.
Uriel had a clear agenda in bashing Monty Don in an unproven and
spiteful way.
That is an obvious lie. Uriels post did no such thing. He
referenced
the previous discussion about Monty; and made a generalisation
applicable to all. That self-recommendation is not what counts. Oh.. and
s/he addressed that observation to you, by name.
Janet
Janet, you have now tried to pick fights with me on 3 different
groups, throwing insult and abuse around. Your behaviour is just
appalling. This has nothing to do with urg, Uriel or anything other
than your fury that I won't play your filthy games with other
peoples' lives and said so a long time ago. That's it lady, into
the bozo bin with you, too.
--
Sacha
Write to her family ;-))

:-))
Care - you could be next in line for her bin !
But --
Thanks anyway
Pete

How reassuring that you two have spoken up in defence of Janet. She's
certainly in the right company.

LOL! Janet can look after herself.
--
Gordon H
Remove "invalid" to reply

In message ,
Janet writes
In article , says...

On 2010-12-16 16:28:05 +0000, "Pete" said:
Care - you could be next in line for her bin !

But --
Thanks anyway

Pete

How reassuring that you two have spoken up in defence of Janet.

Well, Pete, that just about sums up Sacha's killfile.
Janet.

Is there a waiting list to get in?
--
Gordon H
Remove "invalid" to reply