"Sam Wilson" wrote in message
...
Charles Ellson wrote:
On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 20:28:58 +0100, "Clive D.W. Feather"
wrote:

In article , Charles Ellson
writes
But it's ok for you, the government and every other Tom, Dick or
Harry
to force their decisions on us.

In the case of the government, that's what we elected them to do.

FSVO "We".

We, as a country, elected them. Being on the losing side sometimes is
part of the system.

At least two other countries in the Union didn't elect them.

They may not have voted for them, but they did take part in the process of
electing them. (Alas!)

you had the democratic opportunity to change that

and democracy won

HTH

tim

On Sun, 7 Jun 2020 09:04:10 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:



"Sam Wilson" wrote in message
...
Charles Ellson wrote:
On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 20:28:58 +0100, "Clive D.W. Feather"
wrote:

In article , Charles Ellson
writes
But it's ok for you, the government and every other Tom, Dick or
Harry
to force their decisions on us.

In the case of the government, that's what we elected them to do.

FSVO "We".

We, as a country, elected them. Being on the losing side sometimes is
part of the system.

At least two other countries in the Union didn't elect them.

They may not have voted for them, but they did take part in the process of
electing them. (Alas!)

you had the democratic opportunity to change that

and democracy won

HTH

Democracy is a repeating process.

"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 7 Jun 2020 09:04:10 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:



"Sam Wilson" wrote in message
...
Charles Ellson wrote:
On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 20:28:58 +0100, "Clive D.W. Feather"
wrote:

In article , Charles
Ellson
writes
But it's ok for you, the government and every other Tom, Dick or
Harry
to force their decisions on us.

In the case of the government, that's what we elected them to do.

FSVO "We".

We, as a country, elected them. Being on the losing side sometimes is
part of the system.

At least two other countries in the Union didn't elect them.

They may not have voted for them, but they did take part in the process
of
electing them. (Alas!)

you had the democratic opportunity to change that

and democracy won

HTH

Democracy is a repeating process.

but not in a way where there are demands for a neverendum, so that they
eventually win from voter fatigue

On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 20:22:50 +0100
"Clive D.W. Feather" wrote:
In article , writes
All your money. Not the company's - yours. All officers of the business
are subject to an unlimited fine.

I'd still risk it. Unlimited fines are meaningless if you only have a small
amount of savings and debt collectors can't take your house and make you
homeless by law.

I'm not talking about debt collectors, I'm talking about a court.

How do you think the court enforces it? The judges don't go down there
themselves.

On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 20:19:01 +0100
"Clive D.W. Feather" wrote:
In article , writes
Well, the typical "try out" approach is to order the same shoe in sizes
9, 9 1/2 and 10, keep one pair and return the other two.

On what planet?

The one we, if not you, live on. I just posted some clothes back to M&S
today ordered on just that basis (not shoes). They even pay the postage.

I find it incredible that anyone could find that less hassle than simply going
back to the shop and getting an immediate refund/exchange.

On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 22:06:01 +0100
MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 05/06/2020 20:19, Clive D.W. Feather wrote:
In article , writes
Well, the typical "try out" approach is to order the same shoe in sizes
9, 9 1/2 and 10, keep one pair and return the other two.

On what planet?

The one we, if not you, live on. I just posted some clothes back to M&S
today ordered on just that basis (not shoes). They even pay the postage.

I dare say they do. But I for one don't need the hassle. I want to go
into a shop, try something on, buy it if it fits, try another if it
doesn't. All done in a matter of minutes (or possibly longer if I get
talking..!)

And yes we have tried supermarkets, but the range is limited, especially
when it comes to shoes.

Its not just shoes and clothes. The selection of books and magazines at
supermarkets is pretty poor too - pretty much potboiler fiction and sleb
autobiographies for books and the usual slew of anorexics-wearing-clothes
magazines with a few token mags for us chaps.

In message , at 07:45:28 on Mon, 8 Jun
2020, remarked:
Well, the typical "try out" approach is to order the same shoe in sizes
9, 9 1/2 and 10, keep one pair and return the other two.

On what planet?

The one we, if not you, live on. I just posted some clothes back to M&S
today ordered on just that basis (not shoes). They even pay the postage.

I find it incredible that anyone could find that less hassle than simply going
back to the shop and getting an immediate refund/exchange.

In my case (and I suspect Clive's) the shop is 10 miles away and has no
parking. So you have to queue to get into the council car park then go
round and up and round and up and round and up to find a space. Walk
five minutes to the store which has a queue at Customer Services, then
walk back and *pay*, then go round and down and round and down and round
and down and queue to exit. Then drive 10 miles home.

Rather than drop a package off at a convenience store within short
walking distance of home (or has free parking on the street outside).

--
Roland Perry

wrote in message ...
On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 20:19:01 +0100
"Clive D.W. Feather" wrote:
In article , writes
Well, the typical "try out" approach is to order the same shoe in sizes
9, 9 1/2 and 10, keep one pair and return the other two.

On what planet?

The one we, if not you, live on. I just posted some clothes back to M&S
today ordered on just that basis (not shoes). They even pay the postage.

I find it incredible that anyone could find that less hassle than simply
going
back to the shop and getting an immediate refund/exchange.

It's been explained to you

not everyone has an M&S on the corner

HTH

tim

wrote in message ...
On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 20:22:50 +0100
"Clive D.W. Feather" wrote:
In article , writes
All your money. Not the company's - yours. All officers of the business
are subject to an unlimited fine.

I'd still risk it. Unlimited fines are meaningless if you only have a
small
amount of savings and debt collectors can't take your house and make you
homeless by law.

I'm not talking about debt collectors, I'm talking about a court.

How do you think the court enforces it? The judges don't go down there
themselves.

It's clear that where a house is being repossessed that court bailiffs
enforce it

the point is that just because the initial warrant does not allow that as a
remedy, it is an option open to the creditor if initial attempts to get
recompense fail

In message , at 09:05:21 on Mon, 8 Jun 2020,
tim... remarked:

not everyone has an M&S on the corner

I almost do; it's about a mile away at a BP petrol station, but I'll bet
a crate of champagne they won't accept returns of M&S clothing.
--
Roland Perry