Tent thread

neverdespairgirl

Pepzofio wrote: »

What makes me laugh is that in one of the GMTV interviews (I think) she claimed that the reason they were staying in the tent is that they had been unable to find anywhere to stay together, that nobody had enough space to put them both up. !!!!!!???????? He's FOUR. Why couldn't they just share a bed/sofa/floor space?

yes, that's mad. I don't do it every night (for obvious reasons) but I've shared a (big) bed with both my OH and my son when staying with other people, he's just turned 5. He doesn't need a private suite of his own!

sp1987

Ive just watched the video on youtube again and Im far more angry now than the first time

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Xf73JPNJU4&feature=related

She is such a screaming, stompy, ignorant madam who is obviously used to talking to people like dirt off her shoe to get her own way. She has her head in her hands going on about how all her furniture and possessions were in the property and she couldn't get them...why let furnished? Oh yeh, to save on storage costs because why not just have a police escort in someone else's home when you fancy some toys. Toys the kid didn't need for half the year in peru/spain. Ughhh.

The first time I saw the video I thought the tenant behaved brilliantly, I'm now thinking she behaved impossibly well.

If that horrible, vile, putrid woman had stormed into a house I rented from her and said that I don't think I could have quietly and meekly replied.

My skin is genuinely crawling.

lily_livered

Pr1madonna wrote: »

It's annoying me this is being billed as a "meeting" and thus givig it more importance than it deserves - it's an MP's surgery, anyone in his constituency can turn up and tell him their problems, it's his job to listen and that's all.

I don't think it's a surgery as they are usually held in the constituency to the locals can go. Whereas the twitter page for Iwantmyhomeback has just tweeted "Are off to parliament!".

lily_livered

tbs624 wrote: »

Quite apart from LL& T law, it is an offence to harass debtors:

Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act

“S40 Punishment for unlawful harassment of debtors.

1. A person commits an offence if, with the object of coercing another person to pay money claimed from the other as a debt due under a contract he-
   • harasses the other with demands for payment which, in respect of their frequency, or the manner or occasion of making any such demand, or of any threat or publicity by which any demand is accompanied, are calculated to subject him or members of his family or household to alarm, distress or humiliation;

Can you put that as a comment on the nearly legal blog? It would be interesting to see legal comment from them on this aspect of Suzy's case.

sp1987

lily_livered wrote: »

I don't think it's a surgery as they are usually held in the constituency to the locals can go. Whereas the twitter page for Iwantmyhomeback has just tweeted "Are off to parliament!".

Grammar is as high on her agenda as landlord and tenant law, I see!

Pepzofio

sp1987 wrote: »

Grammar is as high on her agenda as landlord and tenant law, I see!

:rotfl:That's exactly what I thought when I read it!

Whilst we're being pedants, something about the Facebook group has been bugging me. Is she, strictly speaking, a 'homeowner'? I was under the impression that 'homeowner' meant much the same as 'owner/occupier' - surely she was actually just a freeholder?

sp1987

I submitted a complaint to Offcom as at least the people working there should be unblinkered by possibly knowing Suzy or her dad or having some other interest in the story.

Presenting bull**** as 'news' really grates me.

sp1987

Pepzofio wrote: »

:rotfl:That's exactly what I thought when I read it!

Whilst we're being pedants, something about the Facebook group has been bugging me. Is she, strictly speaking, a 'homeowner'? I was under the impression that 'homeowner' meant much the same as 'owner/occupier' - surely she was actually just a freeholder?

Ahhh I wasn't so concerned with that. For me 'I are' and people using 'brought' when they have in fact 'bought' something are at the top of my list for spine tingling idiocy.

Loopgames

It's a group so they mean 'we are off ...' Also there are 2 of them. It makes sense to say 'are' rather than 'am'.

john539

lily_livered wrote: »

Whereas the twitter page for Iwantmyhomeback has just tweeted "Are off to parliament!".

Excellent.

We can now ask the MP directly whether he supports Suzy's behaviour, as he has had the opportunity to confirm and discuss ALL facts of the case and the Law.