People That Piss You Off

Log in to stop seeing adverts
This page may contain links to companies such as eBay and Amazon. As an affiliate of these sites I may earn commission if you click the link and make a purchase

Status
Not open for further replies.
:icon_eek:
You cannot be serious?!?! Did you actually read the article?
No 'law' is being 'bent', it's a council 'policy' that is being enforced without any sense or logic whatever. She's the child's mother.

I didn't read that article no, I read the story that the metro ran this morning that led me to believe it was a law. I appear to have been mistaken, but I still think it was a relevant point. Where do you draw the line? Is an uncle OK? A friend of the family? I agree that it is ridiculous on the surface but I don't agree with letting council workers use their common sense on issues. Don't forget that the people you are asking to use their common sense, are the same people whose common sense has caused this story.
 
:icon_eek:
You cannot be serious?!?! Did you actually read the article?
No 'law' is being 'bent', it's a council 'policy' that is being enforced without any sense or logic whatever. She's the child's mother.

Dead on Macky, for Christs sake this family must have a difficult time of it without these control freaks sticking their PC oar in. Just because it policy does not make it right.
 
:icon_eek:
You cannot be serious?!?! Did you actually read the article?
No 'law' is being 'bent', it's a council 'policy' that is being enforced without any sense or logic whatever. She's the child's mother.

But in the eyes of the law, the council are taking responsibility for him once he gets in the taxi. In loco parentis etc, therefore regardless of how stupid they have to do it.

On the subject of CRB's, what is ridiculus about them is that a CRB for one organisation doesn't count for another. Once the mother is CRB cleared for the council taxi service, she would need another to be involved in a different youth organisation.
 
But in the eyes of the law, the council are taking responsibility for him once he gets in the taxi. In loco parentis etc, therefore regardless of how stupid they have to do it.

No, 'In loco parentis' is taking responsibility in the absence of a parent, she is his ****ing parent!
 
The point is that once he is in the taxi the council have that responsibility. Agree its stupid, but its the law.

Unless there is some sort of court order stating otherwise, his mother must have prime responsibility.
 
You don't require any CRB checks to look after your own children, simple as.

This woman isn't a carer, she's a parent FFS.
 
:icon_eek:
You cannot be serious?!?! Did you actually read the article?
No 'law' is being 'bent', it's a council 'policy' that is being enforced without any sense or logic whatever. She's the child's mother.

On the face of it it does seem harsh as she is the parent, but how much notice did the Council give her to get CRB checked.

Maybe she's got an iffy past and doesn't want skeletons out of her closet, just a thought:102:
 
Maybe she's got an iffy past and doesn't want skeletons out of her closet, just a thought:102:

Or maybe she also thinks that it's ludicrous to insist on background checks to accompany your own child, just a thought.
 
Or maybe she also thinks that it's ludicrous to insist on background checks to accompany your own child, just a thought.

This is probably nearer the truth, and on the face of it, as said previously your honour, how much notice did the mother have.

Did the Council give the mother ample time, but being the Mother, she thought she was excluded, or chose to ignore, without checking with said Council, just another thought.:102:
 
I'm sure I said this last year, but I make no apologies for saying it again as they piss me off to the extreme - people who barbeque.
 
Charity organisers / fund raisers.

Don't bother me on a Sunday. Or any other day for that matter. If I want to give I will in my own good time, so stick your silly little envelopes right up your jacksies.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Log in to stop seeing adverts

P Pld Pts
1Liverpool2253
2Arsenal2347
3Nottm F2344
4Manchester C  2341
5Newcastle2341
6Chelsea2340
7Bournemouth2340
8Aston Villa2337
9Brighton2334
10Fulham2333
11Brentford2331
12Manchester U2329
13Palace2327
14West Ham2327
15Tottenham 2324
16Everton2223
17Leicester2317
18Wolves2316
19Ipswich2316
20Southampton236

Latest posts

Back
Top