Unofficial Christ's Hospital Forum

I have been "reformed" -----

TBA has forbidden me to be rude, or sarcastic, to unwanted calls ----

Her point is "You have no Idea, what their circumstances are, or why they need the money earned by their employment, and they probably dislike the system as much as you do ---- but the children must eat " ------Etc.Etc.

I now just say "No thank you" when I can get a word in ! ----- (Not with TBA !!)

NEILL THE NOTORIOUS wrote:I have been "reformed" -----

TBA has forbidden me to be rude, or sarcastic, to unwanted calls ----

Her point is "You have no Idea, what their circumstances are, or why they need the money earned by their employment, and they probably dislike the system as much as you do ---- but the children must eat " ------Etc.Etc.

I now just say "No thank you" when I can get a word in ! ----- (Not with TBA !!)

A jolly jape way of handling calls is to pretend that you are nor the householder/person asked for but you will get them.....place phone on table and go about your business.....return to phone every 5 minutes and check if caller is still waiting....if they are say 'he/she is just coming' and repeat the process. I had one firm waiting for 20 minutes like this!!!!

Oh no - not this again!

Touchwood I rarely get nuisance cold calls being both ex directory and exceedingly reluctant to give my landline phone number out.

However on the occasions that I do I find it gets rid of them pretty sharpish if you tell them you are renting when they ask if you are the householder. No rudeness no wasted time.

I've been getting a lot of calls recently, probably from Bangalore, whilst I've been in a good mood (luckily for him/her!!!). One caller today asked me if I was Mr Brown David to which I replied "No". He then repeated the question and got the same answer. The third time he asked I simply said that "that is not how my name is said" and put the phone down. Why do market survey companies always employ idiots? Another one today turned out to be a computer doing the survey and asking for verbal answers.
My present beef is with the Post Office. I was registered for no sales leaflets to be delivered but after a while the Post Office started delivering them again. It turned out that they had decided that although my instructions were "ufn" they would unilaterally put a 2 year time limit on. So, I registered again and all was quiet for a month or two until the post office started delivering the leaflets again. I have now sent three complaints and still the idiots ignore my instructions.

News today that Indian Customs officials have seized the Cricket World Cup and are demanding either the import duty of $50,000 or a subst6antial number of free tickets to the final.
The trophy had been on display in Colombo and was allegedly being taken to India inm preparation for the final.

The cricket authorities told the customs (no doubt politely) to get lost because they already had a trophy at the game site.

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/02042011/ ... rophy.html

Mid A 15 wrote:Touchwood I rarely get nuisance cold calls being both ex directory and exceedingly reluctant to give my landline phone number out.

However on the occasions that I do I find it gets rid of them pretty sharpish if you tell them you are renting when they ask if you are the householder. No rudeness no wasted time.

we find that too - and they`re always so sorry for disturbing us!
It also gets rid of the guys who try to get you to change your power supplier at Sainsburys
And as we DO rent at CH...... problem solved in 2 words!
(No JR, not what you`re thinking ...... "we rent" ....)

OH DEAR -----
I have, this morning, received a letter from a charity which TBA and I, have supported for many years.
It informs me that, due to "Shortage of funds" it is, automatically, increasing my direct debit by 25%
There has also been such from a certain Political Party..

There has been a "Family Consultation" (TBA and NPE), and our support has been terminated.

Has anyone else experienced this sneaky way of getting more money --- due to "Inertia" ?

BTW -- they have always been unable to spell my name ! --- Neal -- Niel -----

I've always been against direct-debit for the very reason they can almost play with your money to their hearts content.

Bring back the good old standing-order, I say !

J.R. wrote:I've always been against direct-debit for the very reason they can almost play with your money to their hearts content.

Bring back the good old standing-order, I say !

Snap!

I always quote direct debit as a classic example of the evils of "spin."

You know the sort of stuff.... take the hassle out of paying your bills and possibly missing a payment by signing up to direct debit and you don't need to do a thing or worry anymore - we sort out everything for you!

Translation: We have access to your bank account and take what we want when we want it regardless of whether or not you have the funds. Tough titty if you have to spend a morning hanging on the telephone to advise both us and your bank that you want to cancel it. We may even charge you an admin charge for wanting to decide how you spend your own money!

And breathe!!

In the early 1970s when the NI system was being changed, we were supposed to encourage the self employed to pay by Direct Debit. At that time Barbara Castle was Minister of Health, or some such, I went into my spiel with a regular non-payer,whose reaction was "No bl00dy fear, I'm not giving that red-headed bitch access to my account. You never know what she would do with it."

Don't get me started on the "Blessed Barbara"

She chose to announce that she "Was ashamed to be British" ----------
and chose to do so, at a time when we were being shot at and killed, or maimed, on the instructions of our Government.
Suez, was, indeed controversial, but the PBI (Poor Bl88dy Infantry) do not have the luxury of political committee meetings, before "Action"

There have been many occasions, in which the British Services have supported Political decisions, which have been dubious, to say ther least, but to denigrate them, whilst they are doing the job, strikes me as in the worst possible taste.
See my remarks on the Topic "The cost of War"
I consider the description of her, quoted by Midget, as quite mild !!

Babs always struck me as a sexually frustrated woman, who just wanted to wind men up !

J.R. wrote:I've always been against direct-debit for the very reason they can almost play with your money to their hearts content.

Bring back the good old standing-order, I say !

I recently came up against a novel twist on the Direct Debit Guarantee - you know the one, if we make a mistake you can claim the money back from your Bank, this happened to me with a well known power company who 'inadvertently' took my direct debit 3 times in a month. I spoke to my then bank who said 'thats not a mistake as you have given them authority to remove unspecified amounts of money, we can't refund your money'..........lots of phone calls eventually got the money refunded by the company 3 months later!....I'm with a much nicer bank now!!

Chris Blewett wrote:

J.R. wrote:I've always been against direct-debit for the very reason they can almost play with your money to their hearts content.

Bring back the good old standing-order, I say !

I recently came up against a novel twist on the Direct Debit Guarantee - you know the one, if we make a mistake you can claim the money back from your Bank, this happened to me with a well known power company who 'inadvertently' took my direct debit 3 times in a month. I spoke to my then bank who said 'thats not a mistake as you have given them authority to remove unspecified amounts of money, we can't refund your money'..........lots of phone calls eventually got the money refunded by the company 3 months later!....I'm with a much nicer bank now!!

Everything is automated and the bank will not look at each debit. In any case the bank does not know the details of your dealings with the power company so even if they looked they could not see any error. I suspect the so-called guarantee is more in respect of where the debiter goes bust.

Interesting points; was the so-called "guarantee" physically signed on behalf of the power company as is required by the Statute of Frauds 1677 section 4? If not then the bit of paper is not enforceable. I am not totally sure (I would have to examine internal papers at the guarantor) but it is highly likely that the "guarantee" would need to bear the guarantor's corporate seal instead of simple signatures supported by a formal resolution of the company board authorising the signatories to sign. Going back in time, Gordon B "guaranteed" that certain bank deposits would be repaid or covered but did any creditor receive that in writing and signed?