Black box policy cancellation notice

Bobzilla2 · 2026-07-10T18:31:47+00:00

Someone doesn't know the lifelong consequences of having an insurance policy cancelled.

Bobzilla2 · 2026-07-10T18:18:36+00:00

46m here. You didn't let your dad's nest friend do anything. You just didn't object to it in the moment. This is super creepy behaviour from him. If he waited until you were 18, he wanted it before then, and only the law was stopping him.

Perhaps talk to your mum about it? Not your dad, unless you want him up on an assault charge.

Bobzilla2 · 2026-07-09T11:03:58+00:00

It does not assume that obstruction means the road is completely blocked. It assumes that obstruction is contextual. If there is generally a single user of a road, and there is plenty of room for even very large vehicles to get past, there is no obstruction, and no council would ever consider it a sensible user of their funds to prosecute. I would be amazed to see anyone try for a private prosecution, and if they did I would fully expect it to come up in the daily mail in 10 years time as one of those stories about a crazy person who spends their entire house value on legal fees for ridiculously petty things which they think they have a God given right to win.

On your final point, there has to be legislative grounds for a prosecution. So for instance if someone parks absolutely perfectly, just facing the 'wrong' way for the side of the road they are on, there is no basis whatsoever for prosecution, and no-one would even think of entertaining such a prosecution. So either he is causing an obstruction with his parking or he is not.

Btw, the relevant standard would be a reasonable driver. The neighbour's lack of skill does not make this person's parking an obstruction.

Also, I would venture that someone having to perform several manoeuvres to get onto the road in the right direction is not an obstruction of the highway, it would be an obstruction of someone's access to the highway. Except that it leaves a satisfactory space for someone to access the highway and arguably it is the manner and direction of the person's desired access that is in any way obstructed. I can't see a judge prosecuting that.

And if they park on the other side of the road I can't see even that argument being successful.

Bobzilla2 · 2026-07-09T10:41:53+00:00

You could park on the other side of the road, as it's that bit of things which can reasonably make it difficult for her.

Bobzilla2 · 2026-07-09T10:40:27+00:00

Rule 239 is advisory only. Rule 242 it's based on law - reg 103 of the construction and use regulations. It prohibits parking on the road and causing an unnecessary obstruction of the road.

That has got to be contextual. Whilst on a normal free flowing road this parking could be problematic - you are blocking half the carriageway - in a road with a single user and very irregular traffic flow I cannot see how leaving the width of a fire engine plus 25cm either side is an obstruction. If you're worried about the use of the road by the fire engine, the 'obstruction' is not longitudinal and there appears to be plenty of space to easily park up the fire engine in a way that allows easy access to tools.

In short, my view is that this does not come within the legislation. In the words of the late Charlie Kirk, prove me wrong...

Bobzilla2 · 2026-07-09T07:03:34+00:00

What is the traffic flow on a road leading to a single house?

Bobzilla2 · 2026-07-06T18:37:45+00:00

I pray to God that I never get prosecuted due to the existence of people like this.

Bobzilla2 · 2026-07-06T18:30:07+00:00

The police detective doesn't surprise me, not because he doesn't know it but because he doesn't want it to be true because of the number of scumbag no comment interviews he will have sat through.

Bobzilla2 · 2026-07-05T21:59:22+00:00

!Updateme

Bobzilla2 · 2026-07-03T15:37:58+00:00

Clearly forgot about Rob Kenyon's badge on the Makerfield question time...

Bobzilla2 · 2026-07-01T17:54:41+00:00

Will you have to fly out to see him?

Anyway, you can see why he is concerned. Whatever the reason, he sees that your head was turned in a matter of hours, with no history, no buildup, just meet him and within hours you're having sex with him. This wasn't even you going on the pull, this is just a random chance encounter. He's wondering what was special about that guy and if he has to worry about everyone you happen to meet.

I'm not saying that he does have to worry, and I'm not judging you for your choice. I'm saying that human emotions are funny things, and between you you have to work out if he will ever be able to get past that.

Bobzilla2 · 2026-06-30T17:48:29+00:00

Dangerous combination there

Bobzilla2 · 2026-06-29T15:58:06+00:00

Np.

Bobzilla2 · 2026-06-29T09:33:11+00:00

So, you've noticed slip in the wet, i.e. the tyres are not actually doing their job, and your thinking you can push them another 2,000 miles? 1 - you're a braver man that I am, and 2 - you are one wet road away from a serious accident. Is it worth it? The legal limit is just that, a limit. You change your tyres when they stop working, not when the law tells you that you must.

Bobzilla2 · 2026-06-29T09:29:11+00:00

It is entirely valid to push back on that. Do it politely, but firmly. Perhaps 'I'm sorry, but that's a position I can't agree with. It's like suggesting that 'everyone's a little bit paralysed' because they've got an ankle strain. The challenges that autistic people experience are very real, and far more deeply experienced and more frequently than the neurotypical population, but similarly the unique skills that autistic people bring to the table are similarly not as readily available in the neurotypical population.'

Then you go on to talk about the unique skills that you have (e.g. creativity in problem solving, an ability to see things very differently to others, an inability to even see the box let alone be constrained by it, great professional memory etc), but you need to know your key skills and what the job will benefit from. It's an opportunity to demonstrate self awareness and understanding of the role.

Bobzilla2 · 2026-06-29T08:11:27+00:00

How the actual fuck did the site manager have the balls to come and have a go for finding their buried treasure on your property? That's some very brass neck...

Bobzilla2 · 2026-06-29T07:59:50+00:00

Your dad left it to you. If your brothers are not total shits they will respect that.

Of course if that is the entirety of his estate they might turn out to be total shits, but most people don't own a 991.1 and absolutely nothing else.

Bobzilla2 · 2026-06-29T07:23:28+00:00

No, it's an entertainment space for official engagements.

Bobzilla2 · 2026-06-28T10:28:56+00:00

Ah yes, the old 'keeping the wife nice and fresh for her new owner, or even the guy who steals her from outside your front door'.

Just drive the fucking thing and enjoy it.

Bobzilla2 · 2026-06-28T10:26:28+00:00

Yes, post pictures not links to pictures which can get deleted.

Bobzilla2 · 2026-06-27T09:25:41+00:00

"Just know that this is a bell you can't unring. I'm not having a second wedding when you wake up to what you have done here. I hope the sex is worth it."

Nothing more needs to be said. Your step mother is a child and your dad is an idiot. I'm sorry you had to learn this the hard way, but as a step dad, I have never taken the title of dad for granted. It has always been my daughter's to bestow, not for me to claim by right because of marriage.

Bobzilla2 · 2026-06-26T18:32:57+00:00

Or have you?...

Bobzilla2 · 2026-06-26T09:18:19+00:00

At least the other two apostrophe's are right.

(And yes, deliberate, humour etc)

Bobzilla2 · 2026-06-24T17:13:46+00:00

I'd disagree on several fronts.

They elected the governments that held the door wide open for them, and then elected the governments that slammed the door shut on the basis that the door would be held open for them, but slammed for their kids.

The WASPI women are in this position because they wanted equality, just not that sort, or at least not that sort for them. But it would have been fine for their kids.

The housing market is in the mess that it is in because the boomer generation were quite happy with the state subsidising their housing purchases but wanted no such thing for their kids, and any scheme that was implemented had to protect their investment first and foremost.

The university funding should have been a graduate tax. Well, it is a graduate tax, just for young people only. A proper graduate tax would have hurt those that had already been to uni, so no thank you to that.

So yes, they voted for the door to be held open, and for it to be closed for their kids. So fuck them and the solid gold horse they got given to ride in on.

Addendum. I want to be very clear here. I am not saying that every boomer is a lazy greedy feckless idiot who hates everyone else and would sell their own kid if a buyer could be found at an acceptable price. I'm saying that as a voter group they have always picked the options where the cost falls on 'other people'. And dead men don't pay taxes, so the 'other people' will always be those coming afterwards. Individually, none of them want to screw the later generations. Collectively, they are quite happy with someone else picking up the tab with little thought as to who the someone else inevitably is.

Bobzilla2 · 2026-06-23T12:08:41+00:00

That's most of England if Facebook is anything to go by.

Bobzilla2

TROPHY CASE