Puffer

I admire your bravado and wish I'd been there (to ogle rather than help) but it would have been way past my bedtime! Did you drive all the way home stuck in one gear? Or is there some technique for gear-changing sans clutch in fairly modern cars? (I know about double-declutching in older cars, although that surely requires an operative clutch? And I have no idea how one actually performed the task.)

I recall a comment in another place from an American who disliked platform shoes and referred to them as 'jackstands'. I doubt however that they could be used as such, much as it might be helpful in your situation.

No, not addicted to high heels (or railways) but just an interested student and observer of both with some 'hands on' (or 'feet in') involvement as and when. But I confess that some greater opportunity for heel-wearing (in person or vicariously through a good woman) would have been a big bonus but is now most unlikely (sigh!). As to your own experience, my guess is that heels and stockings have shaped your legs and feet too!

And, in case you are all wondering, I'm not 'Puffer' because I'm an inveterate smoker - rather it reflects an interest in railways. But I do admit to having been a pipe-smoker until c2009 and still enjoy the odd small cigar (perhaps 10 in a year) but I am in no way addicted.

To clarify: The ex-GF at age 44-45 was hardly a slim and graceful creature (but certainly not noticeably overweight and had a good figure); she was a hospital worker and on her size 6.5/7 feet in flat shoes for most of the day. She probably didn't wear any heels higher than about 3.5" before I met her, and those not constantly, but seemed to have no difficulty with the 4" and 4.5" heels I bought for her soon after our relationship started. I then took her out and bought her the 5.5" (140mm) patent slingback courts (from Honour at Waterloo) for her birthday and she said they felt comfortable enough. Before she went out wearing them with me for the first time, she told me that she had worn them indoors for most of an afternoon without difficulty and seemed to have little trouble in walking outside over modest distances. So, her 'practice' was very limited. I do remember though that she needed to hang onto me once when navigating a slope in icy conditions - but who wouldn't? After we split up (regrettably, and for reasons unconnected with shoes), I had little contact with her and I doubt that she did continue to wear them, at least regularly - but who knows? Yes, many here will be jealous of her heel-wearing companionship - and I took a long time to recover from the loss of that (and her other attributes) too. Over the years (from the early 60s), I have probably sighted only about four other women wearing single-sole shoes with heels above 5" - memories not easily erased. I have had relationships with a similar number who wore heels up to and including about 4.5" but (the aforementioned GF excepted) never, alas, with any going to 5" or more. And I've now given up hope ...!

1. Regrettably, the woman I am with is neither young nor has a firm body. I think you mean the abstract '... young woman one is with ...'. 2. I think (and certainly hope) that you are wrong but it rather depends on one's definition of 'middle years'. An ex-GF of mine wore 5.5" (140mm) heels easily when walking (after very little practice) at age 45 and she was scarcely unique. And what about Sara (of RoSa shoes)?

From a purely visual aspect, imho those otherwise elegant shoes are spoiled by having the heel set back. I know it can give the illusion that the heel is higher, but the proportions of the shoe are upset and my understanding is that stability and wearability both suffer.

I was above dealing with non-unsolicited goods, and I said in respect of the package that she should '...contact the sender (if known/identifiable) ...'. But as the sender is clearly not identifiable, your friend could not report the misdelivery to the sender, or indeed to anyone else who is 'interested'. So, as far as she is concerned (and ignoring the 'wrong name' which might not even belong to a real person), the goods were unsolicited and can, in my opinion, be retained/disposed of as she thinks fit (as the law allows). I hope she enjoys her windfall, whatever it may be!

In both cases quoted, the faulty shoes and the mystery parcel are not 'unsolicited goods' and cannot therefore be retained without further ado. The correct procedure is to contact the sender (if known/identifiable) and request that arrangements are made for collection within 14 days, at no cost or inconvenience to the person in possession, failing which the goods will be disposed of. Evidence of this communication should be kept. Only if there is no action taken to effect collection can the person in possession keep (or dispose of) the goods after the 14 days is up. It is by no means rare for stupid or lazy delivery people to leave parcels in totally unsuitable places if there is no-one in (and sometimes even if there is). They get chucked over fences, left in full view in a porch or put into a wheelie bin (on dustman day!). I hate to think how much is lost by such action - and how many investigations result.

I did once invent a silent door knocker - but it failed to win any No-bell prize.

The experiences and advice recounted by Shyheels make a great deal of sense. It is certainly better to seek the consent and co-operation of an intended 'subject' before openly taking film or photos. It can pay dividends, as he demonstrated. However, that is not very practicable (and may well be inadvisable or pointless) when a candid, arguably intrusive or spur-of-the-moment shot is needed - and I guess that most street shots of footwear fall into that category. A discreet (OK - arguably furtive) approach is needed in most such situations - the subject will probably have neither knowledge nor concerns about being photographed and will move on, none the wiser. Let's face it - if one wants that particular pic, it is going to get taken regardless of the subject's possible (indeed, probable) objections, based on an an assumption of a pervy interest.

As you say, there is no illegality. And I cannot really see how someone would be in a position to bring any civil action, e.g. for defamation or invasion of privacy. A person going out in public effectively licenses all onlookers (or photographers) to observe, record and comment - again assuming that nothing defamatory results. And publishing a picture of someone in particular clothing together with a critical comment is not defamatory if 'fair', particularly if the person remains essentially unidentifiable or is so well-known (such as a celebrity) that he or she has effectively given up most rights to privacy in the absence of harassment.

And there's me thinking that these were your (well-hidden) secret talents, Freddy! Yes, it does have appeal. Without being big-headed, it is always gratifying to have some special knowledge or skill that most others either do not have or would not recognise. Perhaps proficiency with a musical instrument that few know you have, let alone play. Even trivial things can be satisfying - like knowing exactly how to get from A to B by some devious road route or transport link that would leave anyone else floundering.

Shyheels: I've only just seen your posts and the helpful responses. Your wish to try 5" non-platform stilettos is understandable; something I share with you in addition to also being a UK11. A 5" heel in that size is not too difficult to wear and walk in but, as mentioned, a stiletto is not as easy as a thicker heel. Sizing can be an issue as the higher-heeled (women's) shoes may need to be a little larger to fit comfortably on a male foot, but that much depends on the shape of one's foot as well as the shoe style and make. I may be able to help in a more specific way and will PM you shortly.

Not personally, but I'm aware that others have bought through Aliexpress with reasonable satisfaction. But be aware that (a) Ali is a marketing outfit acting on behalf of a large variety of manufacturers; (b) sizing can be a problem; it is best to go by foot length rather than rely on stated size number. Let us know how you get on.

If you get any argument, suggest to the seller that either he gives you a full refund of whatever you paid (including shipping to you) and you scrap the shoes or, if he wants them back, he must undertake to pay the return shipping cost as well. And if he reneges, report him to eBay or PayPal.

... but, if your nose runs while your feet smell, then you have been made upside-down.

Interesting, Freddy - and by no means boring to those of us born with a silver wrench in our hands. Not so many years ago (maybe 10), there was a well-identified quality issue with a large batch of rogue copper pipe (or 'tube' as some would have it) that had an alarming tendency to pinhole and leak. I doubt that this was unique and may well have also been happening in earlier times, remembering that copper only began to replace lead or galvanised iron in the 1950s and I suspect that (especially in pre-metric days) standards of manufacture were not as strict. But your experience, although fairly uncommon, is certainly a confounded nuisance and I suspect undue electrolytic action, as you imply, worsened by higher temperature. I can only say that I have very rarely experienced a similar pipe defect/failure and I am happy enough re-using old copper unless it is clearly in poor condition - much of the older stuff (sometimes 0.5" imperial) has a thicker wall and will likely last forever. I sometimes wonder whether poor or over-fluxed joints in gas pipe are a worse risk than in a water line. Water leaks do show more obviously and, although damaging, usually less of a major hazard than (undetected) gas leaks. And the scouring action of water will tend to remove flux or other debris that can cause eventual problems in gas lines. Like you, I was very much a copper-only user until a few years ago, when the purchase of a 'totally unfinished-refurb' property with partial first-fix plumbing in plastic encouraged me to use it - after stripping it all out and running it where it ought to go, allowing for my changes in the flat layout etc. I still prefer to use copper in all visible locations, with end-feed fittings (although may use solder-ring or compression when not on show or needs dictate) - the one exception being short radiator upstands which can look neat in white plastic and don't need painting. I am happy enough to use plastic pipe/fittings where it is hidden, especially in awkward locations where the ability to thread and bend is a big bonus, e.g. under a bath or inside a vanity unit. I have used Hep2O, Speedfit and Polypipe without any difficulty; all have their minor quirks and advantages - but I agree that the newer Hep2O (with tapered unions), which is what I think you are using, do look neater if they must be on show. The use of a push-fit (or even compression) fitting on either copper or plastic (or to join both) in a tricky location, where access is limited or the joint may need later manipulation or undoing, is of course another big bonus. But I still avoid unsightly unions if I possibly can, and it is very rare that I cannot make a soldered joint safely without damaging the surroundings - and it may be easier than using a 'fat' plastic fitting in a confined space anyway. Pipe layout and routing can develop into quite an art-form; careful selection of fittings (and, with 15/22mm copper, use of a pipe-bender) can save a lot of aggravation, minimise leak-potential and usually save money too. On the rare occasions I work in 28mm, I use end-feed or compression fittings - bending needs more tackle and strength than I possess or can justify acquiring - and I do have a couple of large wrenches that will fit. I have never needed to use plastic fittings in 28mm - the price is a deterrent anyway (and true of 15 and 22mm also to a degree)! But we can both be grateful that screwed iron is no longer the norm. Pipe dies, vices on big stands, Footprint wrenches and all that. I have a copy of 'Practical Householder' from the '50s showing two blokes attempting DIY central heating in that medium (and with the ugly 'school' radiators that now seem fashionable again - the plumbing equivalent of platform shoes). Somewhere, I do have a pipe to smoke as one of them has, but I draw the line at a fair-isle pullover and baggy trousers with turn-ups.

In this country, yes - but probably not in the US. My father (6' 4.5") took a UK13 or 14 shoe and for years had to have them made; the Co-op had a bespoke service then at an affordable price for the usual boring men's styles. And he had a large bunion on one foot which did not help. Then he discovered 'Magnus' and was able to buy off-the-shelf. My two sons (both around 6' 4") take nothing bigger than UK11, luckily for them. My first grandson (born last August) is predicted to end up at 6' 2", a comfortable height, and I doubt his feet will exceed the 'family standard' either.

(i) Yes, after extensive work on copper plumbing alterations; (ii) Never; (iii) Not continuously. However, the younger daughter of my next-door neighbours (whom I have known since birth) has always enjoyed being 'frightened' by me over the garden wall*, told me I was an 'ogre' and has called me 'Shrek'. [* prosecution pending] You are right; people are getting taller. But I've never felt uncomfortable with my height - just right in my view - although shoes (UK11, occasionally UK12) used to be a problem in the 1960s, but no longer (at least in men's styles ).

Well done! Preston Street is quite a bit further west than your original area (and description) suggested, so I never considered it. It is a street of a hundred restaurants and has something for everyone; the 'Curry Garden' (if still there) was a favoured eatery in the mid-70s for me but I doubt it is still the same. I don't know about double yellows (both sides, all the way?) as it certainly didn't used to have total restriction, with evening parking (if you found a space) perfectly lawful, without borrowing Nan's disabled badge! Happy days!

I can identify with pretty well all those comments, Freddy. On the odd occasion I have met a truly desirable woman who did live more than about 20 miles away, I knew that it would never work out long term. And the idea of moving abroad (or even to the next county) has never really appealed, and certainly not to gain a woman. As I'm 6' 1.5" (or thereabouts), I have always considered tall women preferable if not essential. (My wife - a mere 5' 7", to please note. ) Certainly, I have felt somewhat uncomfortable if with one shorter than (say) 5' 6" - regardless of heels (which, alas, are never worn permanently anyway!). I have certainly enjoyed brief relationships with a few in the 5'10" - 6' 0" range that were enhanced by their height. Strangely, my brother and both my sons are a little taller than I - and two of them have partners of around 5' 4". Their choice!

If the Serbian women also have big feet, I wonder if it is a good place for male heel-wearers to shop? What about Norway - or is it just tall men there?

OK, we must be talking of the area between West Street and Old Steine, south of North Street - 'The Lanes'. There are all sorts of eateries there but only a couple of north-south streets not extending (more or less) to the seafront road. There is a tattoo parlour in Boyces Street but that runs east-west. There is also a tattoo/piercings emporium in Meeting House Lane, which is north-south but largely a (wide) pedestrian thoroughfare. Is the 'slope' (non-Asian, I assume?) actually onto the lower promenade or merely a roadway that slopes down a little in a southerly direction towards the seafront road? 'Rose' rings no bells in this area. One problem is that so many businesses come and go or change names/facades. Sorry, I can't help more specifically unless you have better evidence. Your relatives were, sadly, too cautious in their approach - but the good news is they probably neither truly recognised nor cared about their potential gain, despite your efforts. All too common a scenario, and not just typical of those who have grown up in a 'rental' environment. My late maternal grandmother (widowed in 1920) lived all her long adult life in a modest but pleasant, if unmodernised, terraced house in a Surrey market town. She paid a low fixed rent to a landlord with whom she had little contact. Her youngest daughter and son-in-law had bought their post-war council house on a peaceful estate in the same town as soon as they could, and never looked back. They then discovered that Nan's landlord was willing to sell her the freehold for a nominal sum (probably well under £1,000 - this was c1965) and suggested to my father (her other son-in-law) that the two couples should buy the freehold between them and carry out some modest improvements, such as putting in an inside bathroom/WC (it had neither). I think that Nan would then have lived there rent-free (unless social services were paying!) . My father (also a houseowner) had the means but was never a speculator and refused; my uncle/aunt could not afford the outlay by themselves so the opportunity was lost - to everyone's ultimate detriment. If it had been 10 years later, I could and would have made the purchase myself without hesitation - and that without knowing that Nan was to die peacefully in 1976, aged 93. As to the Welsh situation, many of the homes affected are owned by Welsh nationals. But I well remember the spoof TV advert of a few years ago: Come home to a real fire - buy a cottage in Wales. Very short-sighted: owners of holiday homes generate a lot of local business when they require building work etc, and they probably eat out and visit local attractions far more than at home. In effect, they subsidise the local economy whilst getting no council tax discounts and using much less of the council-funded facilities.

Who they? Are you including Elizabeth Debicki, who is more than 6' tall (just right for me!) but known to wear medium heels (although seemingly in flat sandals throughout The Night Manager)? Likewise, and sandals should have a minimum of thin straps, not a multiplicity of wide bands, laces etc.