comrade

IMO the only proper way to do a US roadtrip is in a Corvette/Mustang/somethingsimilar. Everything else is just no fun on those long and empty country roads.

kind of begs the question: What's the point in CCTV at all if it can't be used to prove anything? Seems to work in London with 27000 of the buggers watching you're every move. Lord knows the police use it at their convenience.

CCTV footage is still useful during police investigations. If the police found someone who looks like the person on the video they can try to bullshit him into confessing ("all your mates have already confessed you will get a life if you dont and 2 months if you do") or search his house to look for stolen goods etc.

My local welder did it for £20 in less than 30 minutes. This was 2 years ago, no issues so far.

Personally, and I have done this in the past with someone who was stealing from us at work......... Went and spoke to them, and having first setup a camera in a discrete area, and asked them if they wanted to tell me anything....... pointed out that before they responded, they should bear in mind that I have CCTV recording (and pointed to the camera).

 

They came clean with everything and we managed to recover all our goods without involving the Police, but as part of the conversation with them, pointed out that I was willing to give anyone a chance before involving the Police.

 

May be worth calling their bluff. If they see a discrete camera and even think they have been recorded, they will have to stick their hands up.

By far the best suggestion. Try to bluff the bastard. Police will do nothing due to the lack of evidence, unless the culprit is stupid enough to admit something.

And, OP, forget about revenge etc. If you were tough enough to pull it off successfully you would not be asking for an advice on the internet forum.

I was very serious in advising caution ,but of course then it was an official document .Now interesting point is if they are no longer in use or legal would you be committing an offence ?.

My mate did actually get 6mths in custody ( quite ironic the 6mths i thought given it was a 12 mth forgery tax disc)

Your mate has committed plain fraud. He got convicted for trying to make others believe that he paid his car tax, which was actually not the case.

I have checked the forgery offences. Forging a document is not really an offence in itself. There also has to be some kind of a fraudulent intent present. You have to have the intention to actually deceive someone with that document. Therefore it would perfectly safe for OP to display his 'fake' disc.

Never understood why people like those fugly things. I much prefer how clean unobscured windshield looks.

Had this done myself, now making 450bhp. Smoked a Gallardo on the traffic light the other day. Believe me, I am a random dude on the Internet, I couldn't possibly tell a lie.

Why are people so obsessed with mileage? Vast majority of modern cars, including 350z last for 200k+ miles without any major issues.

Your car is 11 years old. Whether it has 25k, 50k, or 100k miles on makes no difference to reliability whatsoever. It all depends on how was the car driven and maintained. If anything, at that age you should be concerned about mileage being low rather than high.

Paying to change a car that has done 70k miles for exactly the same car that has done 40k miles is madness. There are much better ways to waste your £1k than that.

TC has exactly zero effect on normal everyday driving. Your brain is telling you porkies.

How can anyone possibly even consider that Malaysian aircraft thing might be anything more that a simple crash caused by the usual human screwup/mechanical failure? Aircraft falling down from the sky is not exactly a once in a century event is it?

Where is this country, ISIS?

Well, there is a big blob of land that is under their control so at his point it is basically a de-facto state.

Quite frankly i dont care about other countries, its obvious they have save havens in other countries where their religion is more relevant, what i do care about though is THIS country and i think to allow people like that to live amongst us is just ludicrous, as do many others it would seem.

 

It will all change if one of these jihadists on a mission actually wounds/kills someone important (politician/royal family etc), then you will see action and swift action.

The point that I am trying to make is that this country does not have a choice but to allow them live amongst us. Imran Khawaja is a British citizen and a known troublemaker. No other country will let him in. You can only lawfully deport foreign citizens to their own countries. UK doesn't have Australia to sent criminals to anymore, remember? The fact that Khawaja has a British passport makes him a British problem.

So the question is, if there was a punishment to suit the crime, i.e deported to an islamic state of their choice, how many would still preach hate at the very country they reside in? Their not stupid, far from it, we let them get away with it so thats why they do it.

1. What islamic country apart from ISIS do you think will be happy to accept those kinds of people?

2. Do you think it serves the interests of this country to have more hate-preachers on the loose?

People, stop talking nonsense. Imran Khawaja is a British citizen whether you like it or not. Where do you want to deport him to? Mars?

What a waste of money. This sign will activate every time:

1. A passenger uses a phone.

2. You talk using hands-free.

3. You use apps that require internet connection, like Google Maps or internet radio.

Not to mention that people who are using handheld phones know very well what they are doing, unlike with speeding, which is often done inadvertently.

do the government realise that by introducing limits for illegal drugs they are implying that there is a "safe" and "legal" amount you can take? Is this the beginning of legalisation?

Taking a drug or being under an influence of a drug has never been an offence.

Funny stats though. I wonder how they worked out what the actual "legal" amounts were? Did someone have to sit there and take a load of coke & mdma then see if he could drive okay? Then take some more until he was a jybbering wreak and unable to even see the car, let alone drive it?

Pure guesswork. There was never any official research in this area. If they did then they would get results totally incompatible with the official government position.

How much is in a line of coke, anyway? Or an average pill? Be nice to know.

Well, that is the problem. There is no such thing as an average pill. All pills and coke are have various proportions of actual drugs in them. There is no way of knowing how much actual coke is in 1g of the stuff that you just bought. Not to mention that street coke and especially pills can actually contain several different drugs in unknown proportions.

The government position is 'drugs are bad so dont do them and thats it' so you will not be able to obtain reliable information on that because the research in this area is frowned upon and any suggestions that drugs can be anything than an absolute evil is laughed at.

She should have taken the money. The only thing that she is entitled to is a compensation of a financial loss that she incurred as a result of the mechanic screwing up. Contrary to what people are saying there is no right to a full refund. She can only get what it cost her to put it right.

Legally 'potentially life threatening' and 'risk to life' mean nothing unless there was some kind of malice involved. No actual harm - no compensation beyond financial losses.

VOSA won't care a bit about a single case of a mechanic forgetting to tighten up a bolt.

http://www.halfords.com/motoring/garage-equipment/car-tools-hand-tools/halfords-advanced-professional-breaker-bar-24-1-2-drive

Always a handy tool to keep in your car.

Don't drive it like you stole it and you will be fine. Until you get used to the car, leave traction control on and only floor it on straights. My previous car was a 95 bhp fwd hatch and I had exactly zero trouble with the zed. Not once it tried to kill be.

Traction control on the zed is good and will catch you even if you do misjudge the throttle.

Any insurance is poor value by definition. You should only ever take insurance that is either compulsory, like car insurance, or it relates to something that you can't live without and can't afford to replace, like a buildings insurance. Travel insurance to non-EU countries might be a good idea, but that is about it.

All other insurance, mobile phones, appliances, gadgets, payment protection etc is just them screwing you over big time. It is a lot better to put the money you would spend on all those insurances in a separate fund and take it out when necessary.

ATTAK Z

Do you have the evidence that you punctured the tyre on that carpark and not anywhere else? Did you get your car recovered from there?

Also not having marked bays will be in their favour, as they could simply say you are only ment to park on the good concrete part even if that means only 2cars can do so.

They could only successfully claim that if they actually tried to prevent cars from parking there, by notices, markings, barriers etc. And even then it would not automatically absolve them of liability.

You need to get a pic of the wording at the bottom of that car-park sign. In my opinion you have less than zero chance of making a claim. You also have a duty of care not to drive into extremely large and visible potholes. - Sorry

What you should or should not do is not relevant. This situation is all about the duty of a carpark owner. There is a 'it is your own fault' defence, but where lawful visitors are concerned it is pretty much limited to you intentionally jumping in a front of a train or something like that.

Good point about the sign though. ATTAK Z you need to photo that and any other sign on that carpark. If it contains exclusion clauses it might be fatal to the claim.

By the way, did you actually puncture both tyres, or only one and decided to replace the other just to keep the wear even?

So is it a case of a written communication claiming compensation to start with ?

You can call them or visit them in person if you like. If they will not cooperate then you need to get a letter from them rejecting your claim, so called 'deadlock letter'. Then you can sue.

To win the claim here you need to prove 2 things:

1. That the landowner did not perform his duty to an acceptable standart. Basically, this boils down to whether the condition of the carpark was so bad that it was not safe to use.

2. That your puncture was caused by the condition of the carpark.