What's made you not grumpy but not smile either today?

Currently reading:
What's made you not grumpy but not smile either today?

Main dealer cam bel price £372. They dont think its worth doing the water pump or tensioers etc as these never fail??? I asked how much to do a water pump on its own then. Oh well that could be £550 because you have to do the whole belt job then anyway....... The mentality of the service desk escapes me.

My neighbour goes for some back surgery next week cancellations allowing... Hes been waiting longer for his surgery than I for my kidney repair and that is now booked after 90 weeks, as long as nothing derails it. Neither of us are immediately life threatened but both have been reduced to tears on a number of occasions and in some discomfort. Its awful at the upper end of the scale but as of nothing compared to those who have missed out of life saving surgery and died. Vote conservative? No vote ANYTHING else and accept that tax cutting is utter nonsense.
I suppose that you can equate not renewing the water pump when doing the cam belt to playing Russian Roulette. If you don't change it then it might fail at some time before the next belt change and it might not. What strikes me as strange is that, although you can buy a belt on it's own, most basic kits come as a kit with idlers/tensioners included. However when you look into the main reason for belt failures it's very often attributable to a bearing having failed which subsequently causes the belt to run "out of true" or slack and that's what ruins it. When you think more deeply about this, because it runs in the cooling system which means that if a seal fails coolant is going to get in and wash the lubricant out, the water pump is by far the most likely to suffer bearing failure. So why wouldn't you change it? It's very common to find suppliers hold stock of basic kits (belt and idler tensioner bearings) but also kits which contain the whole shebang - including the pump. Of course we are talking here about kits for engines where the pump is part of the cambelt powertrain. My local factor tells me he mostly sells kits which include the pump and he's supplying many of the smaller independent garages in the area so this must be what they are all fitting even when they could cut the cost by fitting the more basic kits. I'm sure they wouldn't be doing that without good reason.

I was thinking about their - your dealer's - claim that water pumps seldom fail. This has not been my experience but they may feel this way because, being Main Dealers, they don't probably see many older examples. I bet they do a fair number of first belt changes but doubt if the owner of an older car is going to pay what maybe a quarter to third of the value of the car to get the job done? The price they quoted for doing the belt without the pump is not far short of what an indy will take from you to go the pump too. I've mentioned before that I found exactly the same thing when asking for a quote from the main dealer before I did the belts on my boy's Punto and our Panda. I think their menu pricing gets them confused. Doing the belt and pump costs very little more in labour than doing the belt alone but I think they add the two menu prices together to get the "silly" quotes they give.

As I write this I've been wondering how the odds compare between the likelihood of loosing the gamble with either Russian Roulette or taking a chance on not changing the pump. With most revolvers having six chambers, I think, unless this is the car's first belt change, you're more likely to survive the Russian Roulette experience.

Vote Conservative? not the slightest chance of that for the rest of my days on this earth. Trouble is I can't clearly see who is going to make much of a better job of it. For some time I've been playing with the idea that "our Nicola" probably couldn't make a worse attempt - but just of late, I'm not so sure. Have to make my mind up though because I don't believe in abstaining from voting - that's just a cop out.
 
I suppose that you can equate not renewing the water pump when doing the cam belt to playing Russian Roulette. If you don't change it then it might fail at some time before the next belt change and it might not. What strikes me as strange is that, although you can buy a belt on it's own, most basic kits come as a kit with idlers/tensioners included. However when you look into the main reason for belt failures it's very often attributable to a bearing having failed which subsequently causes the belt to run "out of true" or slack and that's what ruins it. When you think more deeply about this, because it runs in the cooling system which means that if a seal fails coolant is going to get in and wash the lubricant out, the water pump is by far the most likely to suffer bearing failure. So why wouldn't you change it? It's very common to find suppliers hold stock of basic kits (belt and idler tensioner bearings) but also kits which contain the whole shebang - including the pump. Of course we are talking here about kits for engines where the pump is part of the cambelt powertrain. My local factor tells me he mostly sells kits which include the pump and he's supplying many of the smaller independent garages in the area so this must be what they are all fitting even when they could cut the cost by fitting the more basic kits. I'm sure they wouldn't be doing that without good reason.

I was thinking about their - your dealer's - claim that water pumps seldom fail. This has not been my experience but they may feel this way because, being Main Dealers, they don't probably see many older examples. I bet they do a fair number of first belt changes but doubt if the owner of an older car is going to pay what maybe a quarter to third of the value of the car to get the job done? The price they quoted for doing the belt without the pump is not far short of what an indy will take from you to go the pump too. I've mentioned before that I found exactly the same thing when asking for a quote from the main dealer before I did the belts on my boy's Punto and our Panda. I think their menu pricing gets them confused. Doing the belt and pump costs very little more in labour than doing the belt alone but I think they add the two menu prices together to get the "silly" quotes they give.

As I write this I've been wondering how the odds compare between the likelihood of loosing the gamble with either Russian Roulette or taking a chance on not changing the pump. With most revolvers having six chambers, I think, unless this is the car's first belt change, you're more likely to survive the Russian Roulette experience.

Vote Conservative? not the slightest chance of that for the rest of my days on this earth. Trouble is I can't clearly see who is going to make much of a better job of it. For some time I've been playing with the idea that "our Nicola" probably couldn't make a worse attempt - but just of late, I'm not so sure. Have to make my mind up though because I don't believe in abstaining from voting - that's just a cop out.
Regarding the voting, my problem now is they are asking for photo ID, not sure if the passport photo from 1977 with first wife on it is acceptable ;).
 
I suppose that you can equate not renewing the water pump when doing the cam belt to playing Russian Roulette. If you don't change it then it might fail at some time before the next belt change and it might not. What strikes me as strange is that, although you can buy a belt on it's own, most basic kits come as a kit with idlers/tensioners included. However when you look into the main reason for belt failures it's very often attributable to a bearing having failed which subsequently causes the belt to run "out of true" or slack and that's what ruins it. When you think more deeply about this, because it runs in the cooling system which means that if a seal fails coolant is going to get in and wash the lubricant out, the water pump is by far the most likely to suffer bearing failure. So why wouldn't you change it? It's very common to find suppliers hold stock of basic kits (belt and idler tensioner bearings) but also kits which contain the whole shebang - including the pump. Of course we are talking here about kits for engines where the pump is part of the cambelt powertrain. My local factor tells me he mostly sells kits which include the pump and he's supplying many of the smaller independent garages in the area so this must be what they are all fitting even when they could cut the cost by fitting the more basic kits. I'm sure they wouldn't be doing that without good reason.

I was thinking about their - your dealer's - claim that water pumps seldom fail. This has not been my experience but they may feel this way because, being Main Dealers, they don't probably see many older examples. I bet they do a fair number of first belt changes but doubt if the owner of an older car is going to pay what maybe a quarter to third of the value of the car to get the job done? The price they quoted for doing the belt without the pump is not far short of what an indy will take from you to go the pump too. I've mentioned before that I found exactly the same thing when asking for a quote from the main dealer before I did the belts on my boy's Punto and our Panda. I think their menu pricing gets them confused. Doing the belt and pump costs very little more in labour than doing the belt alone but I think they add the two menu prices together to get the "silly" quotes they give.

As I write this I've been wondering how the odds compare between the likelihood of loosing the gamble with either Russian Roulette or taking a chance on not changing the pump. With most revolvers having six chambers, I think, unless this is the car's first belt change, you're more likely to survive the Russian Roulette experience.

Vote Conservative? not the slightest chance of that for the rest of my days on this earth. Trouble is I can't clearly see who is going to make much of a better job of it. For some time I've been playing with the idea that "our Nicola" probably couldn't make a worse attempt - but just of late, I'm not so sure. Have to make my mind up though because I don't believe in abstaining from voting - that's just a cop out.
If Scotland takes the step of being independant I would ask for citizenship. I think the lady is doing a much more measured job than any UK leader since the 60's. I sincerely hope Scotland stays in the union but have passed the stage of thinking you should! If the UK government had made more of being inclusive the union would not be under the same pressure.
 
I don't think it is just on e political party, it been going down for a long time, John Major started it and Tony Blair expanded PFI to pay for hospital building etc. It is still costing 55 Billion before all the contracts end. I am sure NHS could use that.
Apparently for 13 Billion of building work the total debt is 80 billion, small wonder he is getting on for being a billionaire in his own right, not bad for the guy who married the "Scouse git" aka Tony Booth's daughter" out of "Till death us do part" TV series;)
Im sure you are right. We have unfortunately only two parties and neither are any good for different reasons. My feelings about tories is unprintable, and labours structure means change from their narrow line up of poicy is near impossibledue to their power structure, and the leader isnt allowed to! The current lot have influenced the last 30 years more than anyone else and are made up a bunch of low life hooray henrys that I would eject from a lifeboat without loss of a seconds sleep. The PFA saga is as you say utterly ridiculous.
I was Parks Manager for a UK City for a while and found the glasshouses at the plant nursery had been installed on an equally stupid basis and after 30 yeears still had 40 years on the lease to run. The total cost of that facility was astronomical. This resulted in me shutting it down as it was both unviable and uneconomic. The City Councils accountants had to deal with sorting out teir own mess. Getting shot did however protecd over 100 jobs from privatisiation as it allowed us to provice service for another 10 years. Accountants were trying to make me lease small pedestrain rotary mowers over 7 years which I declined to do. We bought them cash and had a buy back deal so they were replaced annually. Similarly they were trying to dictate the ride on mowers were leased over 10 years. I managed to over rule that too taking them over three, with buy back clause built ing and repair costs reduced by over 50%. This led to actually getting all the work done on time for a change as the fleet was actually operational rather than 30%+ being under repair at any one time. It all seemed pretty obvious to me as a way of improving efficiency But looking back it involved a lot of heated arguments. We will have to hope someone comes along who will grasp the nettle on behalf of UK. No point in betting the life savings on this though as inflation has already reduced that substantially and the bet would not be accepted.
 
Im sure you are right. We have unfortunately only two parties and neither are any good for different reasons. My feelings about tories is unprintable, and labours structure means change from their narrow line up of poicy is near impossibledue to their power structure, and the leader isnt allowed to! The current lot have influenced the last 30 years more than anyone else and are made up a bunch of low life hooray henrys that I would eject from a lifeboat without loss of a seconds sleep. The PFA saga is as you say utterly ridiculous.
I was Parks Manager for a UK City for a while and found the glasshouses at the plant nursery had been installed on an equally stupid basis and after 30 yeears still had 40 years on the lease to run. The total cost of that facility was astronomical. This resulted in me shutting it down as it was both unviable and uneconomic. The City Councils accountants had to deal with sorting out teir own mess. Getting shot did however protecd over 100 jobs from privatisiation as it allowed us to provice service for another 10 years. Accountants were trying to make me lease small pedestrain rotary mowers over 7 years which I declined to do. We bought them cash and had a buy back deal so they were replaced annually. Similarly they were trying to dictate the ride on mowers were leased over 10 years. I managed to over rule that too taking them over three, with buy back clause built ing and repair costs reduced by over 50%. This led to actually getting all the work done on time for a change as the fleet was actually operational rather than 30%+ being under repair at any one time. It all seemed pretty obvious to me as a way of improving efficiency But looking back it involved a lot of heated arguments. We will have to hope someone comes along who will grasp the nettle on behalf of UK. No point in betting the life savings on this though as inflation has already reduced that substantially and the bet would not be accepted.
Tha issue with getting private finance involved with public services is the need to make a profit.

Any efficiency savings disappear to shareholders and if efficiency savings can't be made then it either gets run down so they can still pay shareholders..or the tax payer picks up the tab anyway.

While I may be of the Red persuasion over blue..I never voted for Blair and Brown.

Never understood how adding a layer of parasitic loss into an organisation at the top made it better.

Short termism is an issue..we'll get new stuff on long leases..by the time it's problem I'll have moved on and be safely on the board of the company we bought them off...sure that never happens.
 
Last edited:
Im sure you are right. We have unfortunately only two parties and neither are any good for different reasons. My feelings about tories is unprintable, and labours structure means change from their narrow line up of poicy is near impossibledue to their power structure, and the leader isnt allowed to! The current lot have influenced the last 30 years more than anyone else and are made up a bunch of low life hooray henrys that I would eject from a lifeboat without loss of a seconds sleep. The PFA saga is as you say utterly ridiculous.
I was Parks Manager for a UK City for a while and found the glasshouses at the plant nursery had been installed on an equally stupid basis and after 30 yeears still had 40 years on the lease to run. The total cost of that facility was astronomical. This resulted in me shutting it down as it was both unviable and uneconomic. The City Councils accountants had to deal with sorting out teir own mess. Getting shot did however protecd over 100 jobs from privatisiation as it allowed us to provice service for another 10 years. Accountants were trying to make me lease small pedestrain rotary mowers over 7 years which I declined to do. We bought them cash and had a buy back deal so they were replaced annually. Similarly they were trying to dictate the ride on mowers were leased over 10 years. I managed to over rule that too taking them over three, with buy back clause built ing and repair costs reduced by over 50%. This led to actually getting all the work done on time for a change as the fleet was actually operational rather than 30%+ being under repair at any one time. It all seemed pretty obvious to me as a way of improving efficiency But looking back it involved a lot of heated arguments. We will have to hope someone comes along who will grasp the nettle on behalf of UK. No point in betting the life savings on this though as inflation has already reduced that substantially and the bet would not be accepted.
The saying about "pi**ups in breweries" is true about most in the higher echelons, they haven't got the basic skills to run a small business never mind a Country, so which ever party is in power the Civil Servants are the true operators with the hand on the tiller, but the seem to have their own course to follow regardless of political decisions taken.
 
One thing that rankles with me is that if you are "at the helm" or at least on the bridge, in business and everything goes T**s up due to some action or inaction on your part the personal consequences are usually pretty dire and impact deeply - bankruptsy, loose your house or worse. These political types don't seem to play the game by those rules. They seem to be able to cause the most horrific cock ups costing often astronomical amounts of our money and then resign and go off earning millions making speeches and getting elected to company boards where they do I know not what but get paid plenty. Or have I completely misunderstood?
 
One thing that rankles with me is that if you are "at the helm" or at least on the bridge, in business and everything goes T**s up due to some action or inaction on your part the personal consequences are usually pretty dire and impact deeply - bankruptsy, loose your house or worse. These political types don't seem to play the game by those rules. They seem to be able to cause the most horrific cock ups costing often astronomical amounts of our money and then resign and go off earning millions making speeches and getting elected to company boards where they do I know not what but get paid plenty. Or have I completely misunderstood?
This seems to be both the norm in politics and big business.

If you look at the "linked in" of any CEO...it will likely state they were previously CEO of something else. Eg. CEO of one company used to be CEO of such and such..CEO of such and such used to be CEO of one company.

Other than people who set their own company up and rode it to the top most CEOs seem to come in "shake the place up" make business noises...sack some people, hire some people doing similar things to the ones they sacked but far enough away in job description for HR not to be concerned..then leave after 3 years shortly followed by those that came with them.

Far be it from me to say they are all hiring and firing friends for golden hellos, goodbyes and share options..looking from the outside it could look like they are staying long enough to avoid any early exit clauses but just not long enough for any failure to be attributable to them. Of course the next bloke will come in, bring his own team and blame them regardless..but it doesn't matter.
 
Last edited:
One thing that rankles with me is that if you are "at the helm" or at least on the bridge, in business and everything goes T**s up due to some action or inaction on your part the personal consequences are usually pretty dire and impact deeply - bankruptsy, loose your house or worse. These political types don't seem to play the game by those rules. They seem to be able to cause the most horrific cock ups costing often astronomical amounts of our money and then resign and go off earning millions making speeches and getting elected to company boards where they do I know not what but get paid plenty. Or have I completely misunderstood?
That is where their one and only skill comes in, stepping aside with nothing sticking to them except their golden handshakes!!!
Where it does go to court they and their lawyers delay it for so many years that all has been forgotten.
Have you noticed how many politicians of all colours have risen from the ranks of the legal profession, where whether your client is guilty or not is irrelevant as long as they win and the fee is paid?
What is missing these days from top to bottom in many walks of life is accountability.
 
That is where their one and only skill comes in, stepping aside with nothing sticking to them except their golden handshakes!!!
Where it does go to court they and their lawyers delay it for so many years that all has been forgotten.
Have you noticed how many politicians of all colours have risen from the ranks of the legal profession, where whether your client is guilty or not is irrelevant as long as they win and the fee is paid?
What is missing these days from top to bottom in many walks of life is accountability.

Well take this gentleman...

I'm very surprised he has floating the AA as an achievement on here. It nearly sank the company, it was loaded up with the debt of Saga and Acromas...and made into a PLC.

A lot of people lost a lot of money..and the company is still trying to turn itself around from the massive debt it was left with but results don't matter...only "high level" one liners.
 
Sent off the email to the surgery to order the repeat prescriptions for myself and my partner. Got the automated reply, informing me that if I require my medication before Christmas, I have to get the request in before Dec 14th. I think I may have got there just in time.
Just to confuse them further, I sent a reply stating that we did need it all before Christmas.
 
Sent off the email to the surgery to order the repeat prescriptions for myself and my partner. Got the automated reply, informing me that if I require my medication before Christmas, I have to get the request in before Dec 14th. I think I may have got there just in time.
Just to confuse them further, I sent a reply stating that we did need it all before Christmas.
Hopefully they will update their emailer. Don't let it stress you out. We now have a minimum of a weeks delay in gettingprescriptions due to lack of staff. Its now a case of working to having things in advance. But on the bright side dont worry, the nurses are paid the going rate and theyy can have more for productivity improvements.... The last I heard the average nurse works 8 hours a week unpaid out of the good ness of their heart to keep things going. Ill eat my hat if its not twice that.

Please everybody, write to your MP and demand action before the service does collapse. The more pressure electors put on the more likely it is we shall see improvements.
 
Sent off the email to the surgery to order the repeat prescriptions for myself and my partner. Got the automated reply, informing me that if I require my medication before Christmas, I have to get the request in before Dec 14th. I think I may have got there just in time.
Just to confuse them further, I sent a reply stating that we did need it all before Christmas.
They didn't specify which Christmas;)
 
My wife offended a few locals at waitrose. A louder than expected "f**k me, how much!" got some looks from the older well dressed couple behind her
Lmao!! 😂😂 Because they themselves shop there, the family that employ me got everybody Waitrose gift cards for their Xmas bonus. I normally shop at Sainsbury's and Aldi, so needless to say, once my voucher is used up, I won't be going back, lol!
 
I dont like aldi/lidl, very messy and untidy most of the time, the shops just feel cheap. Though if I do get dragged in, the random bargain isle is about the only interesting part to them (cant remember which one...)
 
I dont like aldi/lidl, very messy and untidy most of the time, the shops just feel cheap. Though if I do get dragged in, the random bargain isle is about the only interesting part to them (cant remember which one...)
They both have the random bargain isle in the middle of the shop, they both used to have some really good bargains but this has been eroded by the cost of living.

My main complaint with these shops if the complete lack of any customer service (which is part of the model) and they literally throw the shopping at you as they are measured on the speed they get customers through to reduce the number of staff needed.
 
I'm absolutely devastated tbh. 🙁
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20230117_134528_744.jpg
    IMG_20230117_134528_744.jpg
    9.4 MB · Views: 31
Lmao!! 😂😂 Because they themselves shop there, the family that employ me got everybody Waitrose gift cards for their Xmas bonus. I normally shop at Sainsbury's and Aldi, so needless to say, once my voucher is used up, I won't be going back, lol!
I've always had a downer on this poncey shop. Even the name annoys me for some reason and imo most of the goods are no better than Aldi.
 
Back
Top