FastFreddy2

A very good point, thank you. Thing is, the two sparks I know, also know I'm not overly generous with money, and also know I like the job done right. They are both more than capable, but both get 'good' money without any grief elsewhere. Christmas is an uber busy time as folk tend to get work done in the house for the holiday period. (I've just upset someone because I turned down the opportunity to help him install a new kitchen... And that kitchen needs to up up and running quickly.) My landlord mate/employer has had me nagging him, to nag one of these two electricians to get an extractor installed in the bathroom I refurb'd recently, to help keep the mould away. Is he returning his calls? Is the plumber with two jobs on the table returning calls? (One of which I almost certainly expect to get.) Bit of an aside, (but the punchline is pertinent), but today ..... I got an 'urgent' call about a blocked sink in the house I'd been working in. The tenants (bless 'em) had tried in vain to deal with it, to no avail. Despite having a pre-arranged job elsewhere (that I finished at 11.30pm tonight) I went there to have a look first. It didn't look good. Bottom line, it seems there has been some history of blockages dealt with by previous tenants. However, as time has passed, the old iron (we'll call it metal) pipework has 'furred up' and partially blocked. Tenants who don't know how to deal with fat, had added to the long-term problem associated with metal pipes, and managed to effectively bung up the metal pipe. Fortunately, access was possible, and 20 minutes of prodding with a 10 inch file, all but completely cleared the obstruction. The 2" (-ish) metal pipe that hangs off the metal soil pipe, is now probably the cleanest it has been for 20 years .... The landlord who had arrived earlier, slightly freaked out because I had told him this was potentially a serious problem, helped me re-assemble the pipework leading back to the sink. As we were clearing up, I asked again about the extractor. He says; "If only the good people you want, were as reliable as you'd like." Obviously, I pointed out to him, some were reliable.... We are both aware, none of the plumbers we know would have come out today (unless the place was flooding) and getting out A.N.Other plumber from the Yellow Pages on an 'urgent' basis, would have involved £150-£200 appearance fees. Earlier while at Screwfix en route, the place was as busy as I have ever seen it, and not just with enthusiastic DIYer's. Most were Trades on the job. It's a shame I wasn't aware of the impending change 6 months ago really. There may have been some prospect of me having gotten the job done. But despite your good advice, it just can't happen.

Not at all. I expect the people I know, to fit the right unit. The quote I have on the table is from a long-time customer, who still phones me for the occasional bit of advice, so I'm sure he wouldn't fit anything obsolete. Since the position of my CU is in a bad place, and the tails are going to be pretty short, I'm not contemplating anything other than a 'qualified' install. At this time, the change is only a 'would like', not a 'going to have', although going to have nearly always become a have. My reluctance at the moment (and for the past couple of years) is the prospect of low amp consumption looking like a leak and the circuit tripping? I have a vague recollection of something like it, which is why CU started to come with partitions. I probably have the wrong cause/symptom, but I do remember 'false' tripping being a problem. Since I have a family friend who owns an electrical wholesalers, I'm sure he/they will have the details, and the current solution. My impetus for a change would be the ease with which I can isolate circuits, which at present, is not very easy at all. As I say, the fusebox is in a very poor choice of location. (As is everything here, it would seem.)

I like those shoes in the picture from Zara. I almost bought some myself a couple of months ago in a UK 8. Since Zara come up a size small, and are a narrow fit, too, I'll almost guarantee they will be too small. But it's a really good choice.

Let me pre-empt any possible debate about men/women wear immediately. I wear leggings sold as womenswear ALL the time, save a couple of weeks during high summer, if we get one. I use them to keep my skinny legs warm, and I wear them all the time at home too. They are worn under jeans or trousers. Plastic coated versions are even warmer, since they are more 'wind-proof'. I carry no fat on my legs, and they can get 'bone' cold in a couple of hours. Long-johns have been around for centuries, leggings have not. I wear leggings because they are a third of the price of long-johns, and available everywhere. Mens trousers/jeans don't fit my anatomy very well either, whereas women's leggings tick a lot of boxes, but they are not used to feminise my look. They are cheap at £6 (ASDA) and they fit. I've always liked shiny stuff (as does Mrs Freddy) and the opportunity to indulge in shiny leggings, 'leather-look' or faux-leather, is just too tempting if it's available at sensible money. This thread continues on from another, as to detail more specifically what was almost a complete thread hijack, although the original thread was pretty much an all-singing-all-dancing thread anyway. (Open minded discussion, is always going to wander?) This was the starter: (in summary) Details >> here << Details >> here << Background and provisional report >> here << Further review >> here << That pretty much identifies the 'investigation' thus far. More pictures, and a further review of the M+S product to follow shortly.

During Monday morning I got the idea of phoning Office to locate an 'in store' size 8. If I had to pay full price, I would have a size 7 to swap out. What's to lose? They were able to tell me, 2 pairs showed 'in stock' in the London area. I rang the first store, 'gone'. Stock updates take 24 hours, and that pair had sold on Sunday. PROBABLY after I had left London, as I had left unusually early. The second store ... Had them in stock still. (YAY!) They would keep them, but I had to collect that day as they didn't hold items overnight. I got the name of who to ask for, and all was arranged. I did have to pay full price, though the on-line discounts continued. ?? When I got home it was too late to try them on in any meaningful way, but it was immediately obvious they were going back .... The size 8's were not too small in the foot, though they were not roomy by any means. "Tight" would be more accurate, but the 5" inch heel made up for that, and experience tells me, my foot re-shapes itself after 20-30 minutes to accommodate this problem usually. The bigger issue was the absence of any zip in the ankle region. The wearer has to push their foot past a stretchy but (very) tight ankle at the bottom of the shaft. My left foot which is smaller than my right, took a good 5 minutes of pushing, to get my foot in the boot. Once on, everything was fine, but the on/off routine was a stopper. [In my younger days, I might have had a girlfriend wear these, assured that when things got 'hot' they would be no time for removing them, as the moment of ardour would have passed otherwise.] While some with masochistic tendencies may have favoured this aspect, or those who enjoy the thrill of almost being caught red-handed by a partner, neither of these figure in my life. Unless these were to be worn for hours, they were a non-starter. They desperately needed an ankle zip, not uncommon with boots of this length or fitting style. So, what did they look like on? As usual, baggy ankles. With this design, it is inevitable, because every part of the foot needs to squeeze through the lower calf section of the shaft. These boots are actually touching the back of my calf's, which is almost unheard of with a boot. I'm sure a zipper would have made these an entirely different prospect. Easier to get on/off, and a better fit. Same boot, but my left leg, has 6 pegs hidden out of shot, taking some of the 2 inches of excess away. Looked better, felt better. I thought I would have 30 days at least to return them, as many retailers allow post Christmas returns on purchases at this time of year. Nope. 14 days. They were returned Thursday night, with me having bought them Monday evening. Two trips into London, and expensive exercise, but hey. I would not have known otherwise. And the size 7's ordered on Sunday? Delivered yesterday (Thursday). But not to me. Neither me nor Office know who they were delivered to at the moment .... I was home at the claimed delivery time too. The name on the receipt is not known to me either... No card left, and no neighbour has brought them to me. Not that everyone else would, but I always re-deliver something I've taken in, ASAP. I don't want even the merest suggestion/hint/whiff I might be doing anything with someone else's goods to satisfy my curiosity. "Sorry, I thought it was for me, so I opened it." Someone else's property, is treated as such. And most couriers only give you 24 hours to report damage to a delivered item, so there is potentially a time constraint on the re-delivery to the addressee. Whoever has them, has already had them in their possession for a day and a half (two full evenings). Long enough for anyone to work out, the addressee will be missing the parcel?

Readers and members will have to be aware, putting specific references in the right place (due to the meanderings of the human thought process), is proving something of a challenge at the moment. "Boot Season" stimulated some long boot references, as did "AW2015" as did "Unisex from YSL" ..... This thread started as Office thighs, so I will continue with it as I have some pertinent info (and pictures) to add. As with the Zara thigh/OTK boots, (another potentially linked thread) finding a suitable size 8 proved to be a challenge, after the boot was found to be a candidate for my skinny legs. I had been 'checking out' the court shoes in an Office concession in London over last weekend, and caught sight of a boot I had referenced in the thread "AW2015"; the Office "Eve" boot at £120. While I had identified it amongst other styles, I had not expected the legs to be as stretchy as they were 'in the flesh', nor as slim. Once discovered, the hunt was on. Back at home, there were no 8's available online to be had (again). I know an Office 8 comes up small compared to many other brands, but an Office 8 court, is a better fit than a larger size simply because an Office 9 would just fall off my foot. While an Office 7 shoe would not fit, chances are I could get my foot into a size 7 boot, well enough to establish whether the shafts were anything close to tight. (Boot sizes are supposed to be slightly larger than shoe sizes ~ as shoes are often worn using naked feet, boots often worn with socks.) So I ordered up a 7, which was available. Some of the 'impetus' of immediate ordering, was the 20% discount over the weekend. It has continued online, but stopped in store. (Which is odd.) So a UK 7 in PU was ordered late on Sunday night. If I found the shaft on the 7 was reasonably tight, I might catch a pair of 8's as 'returns', or faulty (worn in store) or keep a watchful eye on auction sites. I would at least know of a style that fitted.... Hope burns eternal?

"Essex" biker boot from Office, AW2010 originally at £160.

Exactly. Perhaps I didn't make the humour in the suggestion obvious enough? Baggy trousers it is then? Are you aware of; More here. "About" here.

My 'summary' is subsequent to discussions with the Council reps. My understanding at the time was that while 'qualified' can submit their own forms, compliance forms/payments can be made (possibly with third party checks) which the council organise and accept. It was how the 'undesirable outcome' conversation took place. Not that this is anything other than an academic discussion anyway, since I have people lined up to do the work who are registered. The (6 year) old boiler is at the front of the house, the new one is to be fitted in what is to become the kitchen, in the back of the house. The gas supply routes are not common. I have to apply for Building Regs compliance (with payment) when I am in sight of starting the work. Their biggest concern is that I want to remove a dividing wall, and they want photo's or a visit to ensure I don't remove a supporting wall. As far as I'm aware, only new circuits (new loading) for bathrooms and kitchens require 'expert' installation. Again referring back to the discussion with the Council, I spoke about altering the use of a room, and their only concern was new circuits and loading in what will become the kitchen. I'm fairly confident the current 40 amp supply can be pulled out of the wall where it now resides, and re-installed 'as is' elsewhere. That being the case I don't need 'expert'. That is also the case with the other 13 amp circuits. Since I may choose to have a new consumer unit fitted, all circuits will need to be tested anyway. Again. I have 'friendly' people who will do this if I ask them. Being realistic, no-one anywhere is going to know what was or wasn't done in my home in the past, anywhere other than what is to become the new location of the kitchen. I have 'unbodged' enough poor electrical work to be confident my work is of a better standard and I have no fear of disasters appearing in the future. I have uncovered at least two fittings where (electrical) resistance producing a fire hazard, was a real prospect. While I like to do things 'right', I am not going to get myself tied up in knots worrying about what I can or can't do. I am continually being chided for 'over-doing' rather than anything else. Even my bodge (temporary) jobs have been known to last 5 years. As you are aware, the whole concept of these new regs is to prevent 'bodgers' bodging. It's all BS as far as I can see. Older houses don't comply, nor do they need to as they are old. (I am fitting a new 10mm bonding connection to a mains water circuit in the next couple of days, in a house that is 55 years old. A situation the tenant/householder would not have been aware of if the house hadn't become an HMO.) In my own home, the bonding wasn't actually connected to an earth. My walking friend's sister had a new boiler fitted about 12 months ago. My heating man said to me, "flue outlet 6ft min from ground level". Walking friends sister: 5ft from ground level. Walking friends sister and partner, more than happy with installation, as was engineer, and possibly the Council. As I look around my street, flues are too close to windows, or car parking areas. Only the very latest new builds are fully compliant, and even then, for how long? I'm not suggesting B.R. should be flagrantly ignored, but I am suggesting it's a bit of a moving hurdle. Sometimes one that isn't pertinent in the practical sense.

I had contacted Zara earlier in the week via email, regarding my order. They acknowledged the query, and said "we'll be in touch". Two days later, no "in touch" made, I rang them. Their opinion was the boots had been passed to the courier (Hermes), who reported it was not the case. (This seems like a long-winded way to explain the simpler term; Lost.) I explained to the helpful chap on the phone, Zara has had my money for 2 weeks, no-one at Zara knows where my order is despite me raising the alarm two days ago, so I felt like I was 'flogging a dead horse.' As such, it was time to call it a day, and I said (twice) I wanted to cancel my order, whatever the outcome of the investigation. He was able to completely understand my position. Tonight I have an email; my refund has been actioned. In conclusion, I suspect the size 8's might not have been available after all? I will keep a watchful eye out though.... Mostly for stock in stores ....

Nope, completely understood. You have provided a completed (empty) circuit, but have not connected the supply. I can't do that, as I will have a live boiler, right up until the meter is disconnected from one boiler, and reconnected to another. Whilst (on paper) I might be able to do that, I am happy to pay a friendly heating engineer to do the final connection and commissioning, very much like the way you have. The difference being, mine is not a new installation, and as such (as you have pointed out) I do not need the qualified rather the competent. While I feel I could justify the competent, I'm happy to pay for qualified, not least because I know at least two willing to do the work, and as of 5 days ago, maybe three. The fellas I know aren't really interested in the grief of the work that I have here. It's unpleasant, slow work that a plumber at best should do, and even a competent DIY'er ought to be able to manage it. But I do mean competent, not confident. "Chancers" as they used to be known, were never short on confidence, but wholly lacking in competence.

Without going into too much detail .... Since this is a public forum .... I was for a time, involved with a chap who said (though I have no hard evidence) that he was able to import goods without attracting 'attention' from anyone save himself on delivery. Since I was aware of his enterprise, I can say (subject to his telling the truth, which to be honest he seldom did) his orders were of the value of circa £1000 a month. Not a lot by way of sales in a large company, but quite a reasonable amount of business for a one-man band, and a single purchaser. Referring back to ITAR, there came a time when not speaking the absolute truth became an issue which, and American retailer (not the same one) informed me that to NOT tell the truth, could land you with a 7 year jail sentence. Mindful margins in the US are significantly smaller than in the UK (say 30% vs 10%), there wasn't a great incentive to lie, unless an order with a value of 6 figures was made, and in those circumstances a completely different set of people would be involved. (Federal Departments looking at money laundering, for example.) The Chinese on the other hand, are interested in getting foreign currency landed on China, so it can be spent buying up the world. (Which is exactly what they are doing.) The Chinese don't give a monkey's about UK taxes, (or indeed UK copyrights ....) Since I can't find my sintered diamond drills, I will be replacing them from China from where I will be shipped at least two items, for probably less than the postage. How is this possible? Ask the British Steel industry... You obviously haven't spent enough time, learning to mimic the girls on the Victoria's Secret catwalk.... The secret (if you'll excuse the lazy pun) is to walk with one foot overstepping the other. To explain another way; Imagine your line of direction with two parallel lines perhaps 3 inches apart. The line on the right is for your left foot, the line on the left for your right foot. As you walk, left over-steps right, then right over-steps left. Bow-leggedness is hidden. I've not mastered it myself, and I expect too look like I need two new hips if ever I do, but it works for very highly paid models.

I have noticed the retailers are completely awash with ankle boots this year, many styled (as with the YSL boot possibly) on the original Acne Pistol boot.

These ...

And specifically OTK boots. We can probably thank the Kardashian franchise for that. Even the younger members seem to like them.

In the great scheme of things, the VAT isn't and wasn't a problem, but the servicing fee was disproportionate in this instance. When US exports were a bit more lax on the "gift" theme, I know of many instances where any Duty/VAT was unpaid, as you indicate. Where I've imported, I have always insisted the real value be declared for insurance purposes. How could I claim £400 compensation on a lens, if the exporter declared it as a £15 gift after all. In the last 4 or 5 years there has been a growing reluctance in the willingness of US exporters to go along the 'gift' route though. I suspect a shift in the ITAR regulations has had a downstream effect on the gift procedure, and has thwarted the 'abuse' it once had. I'm told they go for jail sentences for people who break ITAR regs, over fining, and no retailer wants jail time in America. I've even noticed some retailers specifically mention they won't ship as "gift" in their T+C's. My leather M+S boots have loosened up over time, and I'm sure these will too, though how much time I spend walking around in 5 inch heels remains to be seen. I have another style already with a 5 inch heel, that I enjoy wearing, but they very definitely change how I walk. Not that I walk particularly badly, but I have a very obvious sway to my gait that makes me look like a girl wearing heels. It has drawn some attention in the past.

Pleaser do a variety of higher heeled court shoe, for less money, and in a variety of large sizes. If red soles are your thing (and I think they only look good when new), people sell red paint on the auction site to touch up the soles of Loubies, but in quantities that seem ideal for painting the whole of two soles? Even Louboutin can't stop people legally having red soles on red shoes....

As a suggestion .... Full body photo's: Set the camera height about the mid-point of your height. This could be at table height. Try to get the front of the camera vertical, as this will reduce the amount of distortion apparent on the final image. (If taken at head height pointing downward, your feet will be tiny. If taken from the floor, your head will be tiny.) Some cameras use the information available when pressing the taking/shutter button. Meaning, the focussed point at the time of taking the image (background to your photo) and the brightness level (from a bright wall) may not help getting a good photo. I've had to practice this recently, and used a bit of 4" inch soil pipe for pre-focussing while using a timer... The taking angle is quite important though, and can be used for 'artistic' merit if you are trying to highlight something of interest. If you want to accentuate your shoes, or the height of them, make that part of your image the closest part to the camera. You are right to use a tripod. Media cards: These are not to be trusted, and I empty mine regularly. I recently bought a 32gb card for my phone, for about £9. How good can that be, despite being a branded item? I'm not a great Bluetooth fan. Okay for small bits of data, but a bit slow for large files unless you are using 3.0 equipment which has a better potential. I remove cards on my cameras (to car reader in computer) but use cable on my phone. Either is significantly faster than B/T 2.0.

Really? You are certainly labouring a point you don't care about ....

What an amusing turn of phrase that is. I've no intention of connecting a gas supply to the boiler, as 'the deal' I have on the table is that I'm to do everything except the purge and final commission. That is someone elses job. One of my jobs (I've been around the block a bit) was as a production welder. Three times I've been given full-time work on the strength of my abilities, one of which was to weld up cracks on door panels, using oxy-acetylene equipment. Since this put me in a position where I could blow up a large commercial plant and 50 or so other workers in the building, I ought to be considered "competent" to use natural gas. Pressures were considerably higher, more explosive, and burn hotter. Whilst I did make the mistake of allowing the torch to scorch my hair once, the balance of my gas-welding career was accident free. And these skills seem to stick. A couple of years ago I volunteered to complete a minor welding job on the underside of Mrs Freddy's car. An exhaust bracket had cracked on the main box. My pal did something he called welding, with a MIG torch. (The sound tells you if it's a good arc.) I finished the job, not having touched this equipment for over 30 years. It was still good when we sold the car a year later.

As you will. I have taken portraits of people who were (in practical terms) penniless, right up to and including a couple of millionaires, and their immediate families. ALL have bought my images, and been very happy with them. One sitter, an elderly portrait artist in his own right was impressed with my interpretation of him, as was his wife who insisted she have an enlargement of her husbands image I made. I've produced images of people that made them look attractive, when they were 100% sure that them looking attractive wasn't possible. The fact I haven't wanted to turn something I describe as a hobby into a full time job, is a personal decision, not a a reflection on my skill (which I start to feel this discussion is turning into.) I've even been (emotionally) forced into doing two weddings, which I'd always said I would never do. The images so pleasing, the 'mature' bride of the second 'gig' actually liked what she saw, despite being very very very anti-photograph prior to her wedding. Sadly her husband passed a couple of years later, and the photograph of him on the Order of Service? One of mine. I would never spend £2000 on a lens that wasn't capable of pin sharp imagery. What I want by way of depth of field is something I should be choosing, not the lens maker. While I'm fully aware that large apertures not providing full depth of field is a law of physics that lens makers haven't for the most part, found a way of breaking. It's a technical fault. It's that simple. You are being unrealistic if you are saying it's something lens makers would design in, rather than design out, if they had a choice. I spent nearly 3 years studying photography at an Art College, gaining a formal qualification that entitles me to immediate Licentiate entry to the Royal Society and allow me to legally have letters after my name to confirm membership. My portraiture module got me a distinction. Being further lectured on how I should and shouldn't take photographs doesn't sit well with me, no matter how skilled you might be or how long you've spent taking portraits. The famous portraits I've mentioned, typically of the 30's and 40's, were handicapped by low light levels from incandescent lighting. This often meant the use of larger apertures producing an often unattractive soft focus (out of focus) part of the image. When making a promotional image of an actor or politician, I can't see where eyes and lips being the only thing in focus, as better than the whole person being in focus? The exception to this, is where the face of the person being promoted, is separated from a crowd or busy background, by the use of differential focussing. But this separation is intentional, not the 'dressed up' technical limitation of the equipment being used. I'm happy for you know the name for a Japanese term for what otherwise would be considered a technical limitation of lens design. But please make better use of your time than trying to convince me it's anything other than that. I doubt there's a lens maker in the world that would want to design it in as a feature, rather than design it out, so it's not 'a feature', it's a fault. It's the result of an unsolved optical problem. I'm also happy that some portraitists describe it as a 'creamy' effect. I'll bear that in mind when I have my eyes tested next. I'll tell the optician I have 'creamy' vision, and don't really need glasses. I'm sure he or she will insist I need to see as well as I can, whatever the circumstances... I feel the same way about lenses.

The BBC did a 2 hour film called The Canal, if I remember the name correctly. It was the UK version of a scenic type film done in a Scandinavian country that did surprisingly well, mindful there was no diction or human contribution. I started watching The Canal thinking I'd get bored in about 5 minutes ... Well over an hour later, I had to pause it to go to bed ... Some of the information provided by silent text on-screen was fascinating for anyone interested in history or geography. It may well have been that video that had stimulated my subsequent interest in owning or using a narrow boat. I possibly got caught up in the theatricality of it all. With annual holiday costs typically sitting at £1200-£1500 for us two on a 'budget' holiday anywhere abroad, I would be very disappointed if the annual cost of ownership of a narrow boat was as high as that. Plus, provided insurance costs weren't prohibitive, I wouldn't be adverse to hiring it out. I priced up weekend hire while looking at purchase prices, and weekend/week long lets were staggeringly expensive. I think one 'modest' venue in the West country somewhere wanted £800 for a Friday to Monday let. No heated swimming pool, no jacuzzi, no maid (ahemm) service either. £800! P.S. I have a couple of friends who did the Med during a cruise, and they have friend that cruise regularly. By coincidence they all met each other on the same ship last year ... The ship was/is owned by an American outfit, and tipping was required everywhere on everything (as best I can make out). It was possible to have 'tipping packages' included in the holiday price, but the couple I know were still compelled to tip their waiting staff at the end of the cruise anyway. I think the holiday cost them the better part of £1800 each and lasted a week I think. (Might have been 10 days, I can't remember exactly). It didn't compare well to a 2 week stay on land, even with food included, and the food wasn't that great given the price. In hindsight the couple now know they paid more than they should, and even fell out with the travel agent over lies/mis-selling of the cruise. (ie. "Your tipping package of £200 each will be included." It wasn't, even though they were told TWICE on separate occasions by two different people that it was,) They did have a great time though, not least due to the lovely couple they met who repeatedly treated them to champagne. Apparently the 'ol fella' was keen to spend the inheritance money before the ungrateful children got to it. Their bar bill ran into thousands ...

It's been a while since I imported anything, excluding £5 worth of sintered diamond drills from China .... For some reason I had remembered (incorrectly) anything under the value of £34/£35 didn't attract any form of duty. It doesn't if the item is sent as a gift, but retail purchases aren't gifts, and laws in the US have stiffened to be be quite punitive if retailers lie. (Which used to be quite common - I understand). When Apparelsave offered an ankle boot with a minor blemish at £21 plus £5 delivery, and since I'd almost made a purchase of the same style when it was at the discounted price of £50/£60, I bought the boots. While I wasn't overly happy at being (rightly) charged £5 VAT on the imported goods, I was completely frustrated at the £8-97 charge for 'processing' (paying) the £5 VAT charge. Highway robbery? Oh yeeees. The boots were advertised as a UK8 and US9½ which I know Nine West can be. They are not however, they are at best a UK7½ and I think closer to a 7. They have a 5 inch heel, which is why I liked them, and how far would I usually walk in a 5 inch heel? I'm hoping that damp-ish feet, might help change the shape enough to allow my right foot to become comfortable in them. My left foot, which is slightly smaller, sits in the left boot quite happily. The right boot needs a little more effort. I've had this several times before, and I put it down to a toe that curves under another on my right foot. A bit extreme, but if I had a choice, I'd only have 4 toes on that foot. Honestly, I don't need 5 and that toe is going to cause me problems when I get older. (Get older? ) I think I might be keeping them, rather than selling them on an auction site. I would recommend Apparelsave. Comms were not fast, as a query I had on another style took 3 days to get a reply, but I did get a reply. The dispatch of my boots was fairly prompt, if the courier was not quick. At £5 for carriage, I'm happy with the delivery timescale. I'm not happy with the 'processing' charge though, as I can't see being more than the actual VAT being justifiable. That 'processing' fee might seem more acceptable if the purchase value was £100+ I suppose.

Experience to date, suggests the answer to the question posed (as I understand the question) is a resolute and emphatic "NO"! Or "Non certe!" to those who would understand the term. (That wouldn't be me, if there was any doubt. ) While speaking (if I remember correctly) to someone who might have been working in the local Building Regs office, as to what a "suitably qualified" gas boiler installer might look like, there was a suggestion that 'someone who installs a gas boiler without blowing up the rest of the street' was thus qualified. This conclusion was drawn after the immediately previous remark and undeniable reverse logic, that someone who DID blow up a building certainly wouldn't be considered 'qualified'. Where you have 'slop' I would think some sort of (metal) hollow wall plug, with a thumbscrew bolt could be adapted in some way to do the job? But you are right in what you say, not much joined up thinking gone into the installation procedure. Usually, when I consult the makers about this sort of thing the response often includes; "You're the first to ask." While they silently add another tick to a box that already has 100+ ticks in it..... Sounds like the installation kept you away from causing mischief elsewhere at least.

I've never been big on holidays, ever. I have too many times, watched people struggle through 50 weeks of the year, to ensure they had a good time for their two week holiday. Not for me. I prefer 50 weeks of having a good time, and two weeks of wall-staring (if it came to it). "Life" is a holiday to me, even when working. When we're away and Mrs Freddy is doing her sun-lounger work-out, book in hand, I'm either exploring the (usually desolate) sea-bed when snorkelling, or seeing how far I can walk without being missed. The canal holiday doesn't involve long queues or security checks. Nor being somewhere two hours before I do anything useful, and avoids 2-4 hours of enduring the irritating passenger in front of me having reclined their chair into my face, 5 minutes after I sat down. The narrow boat (or not so narrow boat) idea got far enough this year for me to have priced up one or two, with a view to making a purchase. A good bit cheaper than a second (brick) home .... "Nail on head". For at least one year, we had three holidays, and for a long period, two a year. Ibiza in September (and sometimes May), Lanzarote in February. These days, air travel is so unpleasant, I just don't want to go. It's never been a pleasure, though I like airports, (so romantic) but air travel has never been enjoyable at all. While Mrs Freddy used to try to entice me with; "Where d'you want to go? I'll pay!" Even a free one is unattractive when you have to go through the security procedure. There were some periods when 'work' involved air travel (my brother travels extensively to the Far East every other week), were that the case now, I'd be looking for employment elsewhere. Root canal work, is quicker and less painful.