To be really enjoying Boris Johnson's downfall Part 3 Cake ambush

[Notonthestairs]

To be really enjoying Boris Johnson's downfall Part 2 http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/amiibeingunreasonable/4459992-To-be-really-enjoying-Boris-Johnsons-downfall-Part-2

And on it goes.

The test for work done in the home during lockdown was whether or not the workperson was willing to do it - not the urgency or lack thereof

We had a leaking roof during lockdown and found that just over half of the companies we contacted were on furlough and not undertaking work, while the remainder were willing to inspect and quote

Your first para is totally wrong. The Criteria was if the work was ESSENTIAL . So yes to a leaking roof which can cause damage to the fabric of the building.

I know some trade people who were fitting a new kitchen in the EMPTY home of an elderly lady who was in hospital. The neighbours called the police who attended and told the tradesmen that :

The new sink was essential as was the base unit in which it was fitted. But the wall cabinet and other base units and worktop were not.

And the electrician was allowed to do the sink, cooker and fridge . But the under cabinet lighting and supply for the dishwasher were not essential.

The plumber was ok as the sink was essential but the joiner and electrician were fined.

@Florianus

jgw1: What puzzles me is why some posters seem intent on suggesting that nothing much happened and if something did happen one compared it to parking on a yellow line

As was explained pretty clearly, the fine for breaking a covid regulation is less than that for parking on a yellow line.

@Florianus ...and i pulled you up on that false information (its becoming a habit)

Have a look....

Restrictions on leaving the home, and restrictions on small gatherings
£200 (reduced to £100 if paid within 14 days)
Doubles with each subsequent offence
£6,400 (for the sixth and subsequent offences)

Large gatherings of more than fifteen people
£800 (reduced to £400 if paid within 14 days)
Doubles with each subsequent offence
£6,400 (for the fifth and subsequent offences)

Illegal raves and large gatherings of more than thirty people
£10,000

Does that look like a Parking fine to you?

Sounds like the police were making it up as they went along @lONA.

@Blossomtoes

My Tory friend - yes, I know, it constantly astonishes both of us too - reckons if Johnson is still in Downing St the local elections will be a blood bath for them. She wants him out as much as I do.

I should have thought that many Tories would want him out more than we do, since Big Baby being in post means they all lose support.

@jcyclops whilst you might have a point, its the degree of hypocrisy.

In times of national and international emergency, we look to our leaders to make the right decisions and act in a way that inspires faith in their actions.
As lovely as Kay Burley is, we simply do not look to her to lead the nation plus she accepted her punishment at the time & it was one offence.

BJ & his Govt set the law on CV restrictions, he drove a coach n horses through them, to the majority, he has no credibility.

Imagine what the country's response to him announcing new restrictions next Winter should a new more dangerous variant appear?

No, I am calling out those who make false accusations as if they are "in the know" and then cannot defend what they claim when challenged.

Are you calling yourself out?
Is that why this thread is so long?

This isthe most moving account I’ve seen of why people are so angry. It’s heartbreaking.

As was explained pretty clearly, the fine for breaking a covid regulation is less than that for parking on a yellow line.

The point is not the cost of the fine.

People didn’t stick to the rules because they were afraid of fines. They did it because they believed it was the right thing to do, even though that came at great cost, or because rules were put in place (e.g. limited numbers at funerals) that have them no choice.

@merrymouse

As was explained pretty clearly, the fine for breaking a covid regulation is less than that for parking on a yellow line.

The point is not the cost of the fine.

People didn’t stick to the rules because they were afraid of fines. They did it because they believed it was the right thing to do, even though that came at great cost, or because rules were put in place (e.g. limited numbers at funerals) that have them no choice.

The fines were many times that for parking offences.

@liliainterfrutices

This isthe most moving account I’ve seen of why people are so angry. It’s heartbreaking.

That is so beautifully written.

@I0NA

The test for work done in the home during lockdown was whether or not the workperson was willing to do it - not the urgency or lack thereof

We had a leaking roof during lockdown and found that just over half of the companies we contacted were on furlough and not undertaking work, while the remainder were willing to inspect and quote

Your first para is totally wrong. The Criteria was if the work was ESSENTIAL . So yes to a leaking roof which can cause damage to the fabric of the building.

I know some trade people who were fitting a new kitchen in the EMPTY home of an elderly lady who was in hospital. The neighbours called the police who attended and told the tradesmen that :

The new sink was essential as was the base unit in which it was fitted. But the wall cabinet and other base units and worktop were not.

And the electrician was allowed to do the sink, cooker and fridge . But the under cabinet lighting and supply for the dishwasher were not essential.

The plumber was ok as the sink was essential but the joiner and electrician were fined.

IONA: Your first para is totally wrong. The Criteria was if the work was ESSENTIAL

If you look up the government guidance on getting work done in the home during the pandemic, you will see that I am correct. There is nothing in the legislation for which your policemen falsely claimed. The guidance (Guidance, not legislation) said:

"There is currently no list of which jobs can and cannot be carried out by tradespeople in people’s homes, however both the householder and business should consider how important it is to get the job done"

Note the phrase "how important it is to get the job done" - nothing about the job being essential.

merrymouse
The point is not the cost of the fine. People didn’t stick to the rules because they were afraid of fines.

I didn't say they were afraid. I pointed out the fact that the tariff started below that of parking fines is an indication of how important the legisdlators regarded breaking the rules.

@Notonthestairs

I think the suggestion that the Met have intervened to assist Johnson (whether it's correct or not) will be very difficult to shake off. As such it draws in more public attention and more outrage - and therefore puts MP's under greater pressure.

If the Met can provide more explanation then it might settle.

But I don't think this story will fizzle out they way some hope it will.

It the Met provide enough evidence to the CPS for prosecutions to be brought, then I will accept that they are actually just doing their job.

thesecretbarrister.com/2022/01/28/why-on-earth-would-the-metropolitan-police-ask-sue-gray-to-redact-key-parts-of-her-independent-report/

Worth a read.

As you say jgw - we'll only be able to assess if/when charges are brought.

I pointed out the fact that the tariff started below that of parking fines is an indication of how important the legisdlators regarded breaking the rules

You are now just making stuff up, i ve told you the fine tariffs.

I didn't say they were afraid. I pointed out the fact that the tariff started below that of parking fines is an indication of how important the legisdlators regarded breaking the rules.

I think you are completely wrong to say that you can assess the importance of a rule in this way.

I also think that if the government suggested that the rules that forced people to make such awful choices were no more important than parking regulations, they would have to resign immediately. The cruelty would be too much for any reasonable person to support.

The suggestion you are making is abhorrent.

Alexandra2001:
Does that look like a Parking fine to you?

The starting rate does. All fixed penalty notices increase in demand if there are additional circumstances or if the fine is not paid. The hairdresser in Bradford who continued to remain open despite being told it was illegal eventually racked up £17,000 in fines. Another in Rugeley racked up a total of £15,000 for the same reason.

It is quite likely that the person who organised the events in Downing Street will be fined at or near the top of the tariff you published (and will almost certainly be sacked).

merrymouse
I think you are completely wrong to say that you can assess the importance of a rule in this way.

You are perfectly entitled to think that, but it is how the British justice system works. The more serious the offence, the harsher the penalty.

The suggestion you are making is abhorrent.

It is not a suggestion but a fact: the more serious the offence the harsher the penalty.

The thing about fixed penalties is they are just a cheap easy way to impose a fine. If they tried to take everyone to court instead of issuing a fixed penalty the court system would collapse. If you don't pay the fine you go to court if you do pay the fine you are accepting guilt.

@Florianus

Alexandra2001: Does that look like a Parking fine to you?

The starting rate does. All fixed penalty notices increase in demand if there are additional circumstances or if the fine is not paid. The hairdresser in Bradford who continued to remain open despite being told it was illegal eventually racked up £17,000 in fines. Another in Rugeley racked up a total of £15,000 for the same reason.

It is quite likely that the person who organised the events in Downing Street will be fined at or near the top of the tariff you published (and will almost certainly be sacked).

Wow a £17,000 fine for parking outside the hairdressers in Bradford.

I shan't be having my hair done there then.

@Florianus

merrymouse I think you are completely wrong to say that you can assess the importance of a rule in this way.

You are perfectly entitled to think that, but it is how the British justice system works. The more serious the offence, the harsher the penalty.

The suggestion you are making is abhorrent.

It is not a suggestion but a fact: the more serious the offence the harsher the penalty.

How does the penalty compare for a multi-million pound covid recovery fund fraud as compared to a few desperately needed quid on universal credit fraud?

Do the appropriate agencies put proportionate energy into investigating both?

Can I just say that I love everyone on this thread who agrees that Boris is a lying narcissist twat. Everyone else, well what can I say.

jgw1:
Wow a £17,000 fine for parking outside the hairdressers in Bradford.

Eh? Sounds like you need better English comprehension skills. Start by considering whether the phrase "staying open despite being told it was illegal" refers to parking or breaking Covid laws. Either that or you should stop wasting time with nonsensical messages.

You are perfectly entitled to think that, but it is how the British justice system works. The more serious the offence, the harsher the penalty.

No, you are completely wrong.

There is no uniform scale that says that a speeding fine and a late self assessment form are equally important. There isn’t parity in prison sentences either.

Fines are set based on pragmatism and political and economic circumstances at the time.

Either that or you should stop wasting time with nonsensical messages.

Right back at you.