New neighbours don't get the etiquette

Arklight

I don't think the OP has even been seen since Page 2. Why is this thread still going?

AdrianC

Arklight wrote: »

I don't think the OP has even been seen since Page 2. Why is this thread still going?

New around here?

EdGasketTheSecond

Scrapit wrote: »

God, another one.
Answer this. Have you read what I wrote?
I mentioned criminal damage.
I am not nobody.
I am somebody.
Who mentioned criminal damage.
I mentioned it in post #126.


Ed then stated : This was post #128, and this is important:

The above was post number 130.
is what I wrote in post #133.
Everyone following so far? I thought and still do think that if you park on someone's drive it is likely you will end up with a damaged vehicle. Anyone disagree?
Ed then got himself into a bit of a tizzy, cos I stated that he wasn't correcting me (remember post number130). He wasn't correcting me, even though my post, #126 is one of the three posts he referred to.
He wasn't correcting me, everyone agree? Hard to disagree when the maths and quotes are there.
He then referred to trespass in post#134 stating that I was incorrect.

This was in response to part of my post #133 when I stated "And it's plainly obvious that it's illegal." Criminal damage is illegal and is obviously so. The same criminal damage I referred to in post126. The same criminal damage I clarified in post #138.

The same criminal damage I referred to in post#133 but ed neglected to quote and I suspect was the start of his confusion.
In conclusion, the CPS are the authority for the definition of crimes.
Criminal damage is likely, imho, and is ilegal (Not in my opinion).
Ed should read when replying.
Doam should follow simple instructions when told and reread the posts to avoid looking silly.
Any questions?

Yes:
1) What are you banging on about criminal damage for? You are the only one talking about it.
2) No criminal damage would be comitted by the OP parking on someone else's driveway; why do you think it would?
3) Why do you reference a CPS document that has nothing to do with the topic; i.e. parking on someone else's drive / trespass?
4) Have you seen a doctor?

Scrapit

EdGasketTheSecond wrote: »

Yes:
1) What are you banging on about criminal damage for? You are the only one talking about it.cos I believe It will happen or is at least likely. Why are you banging on about trespass, you are the only one talking about it?
2) No criminal damage would be comitted by the OP parking on someone else's driveway; why do you think it would?I never said such a thing. Why would would you think I would? Especially after the explanation above. My effort was clearly wasted on the hard of learning.
3) Why do you reference a CPS document that has nothing to do with the topic; i.e. parking on someone else's drive / trespass? because criminal damage would be likely to occur if the trespassing did occur. Why does this keep needing to be said? Seriously?
4) Have you seen a doctor?on occasion, ever seen a teacher?

Oh. My. Actual. Goodness.
Just goes to show you can't educate pork. No matter how hard I try.

DoaM

Ah! So your entire argument is that Ed mentioned 3 previous posts, one of which happened to be yours, when in fact only 2 of the posts (excluding yours) directly related to the trespass angle?

Sheesh! Talk about obtuse ... don't you think you could have made that abundantly clear umpteen posts ago, rather than let this drag on? (Of course you couldn't ... otherwise you wouldn't be able to claim a superficial "victory" - which nobody else cares about).

Scrapit

DoaM wrote: »

Ah! So your entire argument is that Ed mentioned 3 previous posts, one of which happened to be yours, when in fact only 2 of the posts (excluding yours) directly related to the trespass angle?

Sheesh! Talk about obtuse ... don't you think you could have made that abundantly clear umpteen posts ago, rather than let this drag on? (Of course you couldn't ... otherwise you wouldn't be able to claim a superficial "victory" - which nobody else cares about).

just to refresh your memory, I repeatedly said reread what was written. But clearly that didn't happen. You n ed got the wrong end of the wrong stick and then over committed in spectacular fashion. That kind of stupid takes practice.

DoaM

Thanks for confirming you were being obtuse ... you could have made that eminently clear days ago yet chose not to.

I'm out now - enjoy what you think is having the last laugh.

EdGasketTheSecond

Actually I did correct Scrapit's post in my post 128: "...and the householder would be commiting a crime if they were to interfere with your car".


Anyway I'm out too; no point arguing with a moron.

newbutold

LADYXXMACBETH wrote: »

God no! I'm not Timmy Mallet. I think I'd describe myself as artistic, but with bad taste. I'm the front door that is blue, but I can't just have a blue door, it also has to have clouds on it.
I own a lot of pairs of Doc Martens, even a pair on teenage mutant ninja turtle ones
The neighbours are older, I'm mid 30s. They're what I would consider self made, social climbers. I'm more of a came from wealthy stock, but pretend I'm not. I listen to an awful lot of Radio 4 and say cheerio when I'm saying goodbye. Clash of cultures. I'm in quite a wealthy area well, wealthy for the north and I'm a barmaid on minimum wage in a council house.
I think it was just her rudeness at the beginning, got my back up. If she had been more polite, I would be more than happy to accommodate her. However, she didn't seem to want to be reasonable so how can you expect anyone else to be.
Anyhoo, this has become quite a funny little thread, and whilst there hasn't been any real advice it has certainly made me aware there are a lot of people who really take parking seriously (this is not a bad thing, I just didn't realise it offended people so much). If I see her I will definitely have a chat, but if she's going to shout and bawl at me again then she'll just have to put up with my parking where she doesn't like it.

It she shouted at me, I’d be parking my car across her drive but not on it, whilst she was parked on the road. If her car isn’t on her drive, then you’re not blocking her in. ��

Scrapit

EdGasketTheSecond wrote: »

Actually I did correct Scrapit's post in my post 128: "...and the householder would be commiting a crime if they were to interfere with your car".


Anyway I'm out too; no point arguing with a moron.

How did you correct me? A moron would believe they did.;)