Doing a foreigner

[the Omrud]

There are workmen at the house opposite, apparently fitting a new
bathroom. They started on Saturday morning and they're working through
Sunday, so we suspect that they are doing a foreigner.

Does this expression travel? I'm convinced that I never heard it until
some time after I'd moved to NW England.

--
David

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

the Omrud skrev:

What does it mean?

--
Bertel, Kolt, Denmark

[Derek Turner]

On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 13:09:26 +0100, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:

> What does it mean?

Working for cash-in-hand, no tax paid and usually using your bosses tools/
equipment. Your boss, of course, knows nothing about it and would sack
you if she did.

Certainly has currency in the Midlands.

[Derek Turner]

On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 12:13:17 +0000, Derek Turner wrote:


> Working for cash-in-hand, no tax paid and usually using your bosses
> tools/
> equipment.

doh! boss's

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Sunday, November 8, 2015 at 7:13:20 AM UTC-5, Derek Turner wrote:
> On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 13:09:26 +0100, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:

[rather more than Derek quoted, so only people with memories know what he's talking about]

> > What does it mean?
>
> Working for cash-in-hand, no tax paid and usually using your bosses tools/
> equipment. Your boss, of course, knows nothing about it and would sack
> you if she did.
>
> Certainly has currency in the Midlands.

Sounds racist, no? Only "foreigners" would do something underhanded?

Not even The Donald has suggested anything like that.

[Derek Turner]

On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 05:58:53 -0800, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> Sounds racist, no? Only "foreigners" would do something underhanded?
>
> Not even The Donald has suggested anything like that.

I don't think so. More 'foreign' to the legitimate business, irregular,
outside the normal, I think.

FWIW Oxford online has:

2 British informal A piece of work done for private gain without an
employer’s permission or without declaration to the relevant authorities.

[Stan Brown]

On Sun, 8 Nov 2015 11:59:57 +0000, the Omrud wrote:
> There are workmen at the house opposite, apparently fitting a new
> bathroom. They started on Saturday morning and they're working through
> Sunday, so we suspect that they are doing a foreigner.
>
> Does this expression travel?

Never heard it round this manor, Squire.

The two AmE colloquial meanings of "doing" that might fit are
"killing" and "having sex with".

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://BrownMath.com/
http://OakRoadSystems.com/
"The difference between the /almost right/ word and the
/right/ word is ... the difference between the lightning-bug
and the lightning." --Mark Twain

[Whiskers]

Not heard here down south. Interesting expression though; 'doing'
someone usually means cheating that person (as in "you've been done,
mate" when you've paid more than you needed to) so extending the idea to
exploiting a foreigner does make some sense.

--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~

[GordonD]

I'd say "doing a homer" (nothing to do with the Simpsons!)
--
Gordon Davie
Edinburgh, Scotland

[Jerry Friedman]

And the OED's first citation, confirming your suggestion, is

"1943 J. L. Hunt & A. G. Pringle Service Slang 33 Such articles [as
models of aircraft], made in the ‘firm's’ time and with the ‘Company's’
material, are called ‘foreigners’, as they are outside the normal work
done by the employee or airman or soldier."

--
Jerry Friedman

[Charles Bishop]

In article <5PG%x.81709$bA1....@fx41.am4>,

If it has travelled, it hasn't reached ears on the west coast (southern
division) of the US.

--
charles

[Charles Bishop]

In article <MPG.30a9251d3...@news.individual.net>,

Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:

> On Sun, 8 Nov 2015 11:59:57 +0000, the Omrud wrote:
> > There are workmen at the house opposite, apparently fitting a new
> > bathroom. They started on Saturday morning and they're working through
> > Sunday, so we suspect that they are doing a foreigner.
> >
> > Does this expression travel?
>
> Never heard it round this manor, Squire.
>
> The two AmE colloquial meanings of "doing" that might fit are
> "killing" and "having sex with".

Isn't there one more: performing? "He's doing a one-eighty"

--
c

[Charles Bishop]

In article <da8sit...@mid.individual.net>,

That could be "a side job" here. The reason I'm unsure is that I'm
unsure whether the "using his boss's tools without permission or
knowledge" applies. The knowledge part might fit, but often a worker
will have his own tools that are used on the boss's jobs.

There might be another phrase that is dancing around on my tongue's tip,
but I can't think of it.

--
charles

[Peter T. Daniels]

It does -- but unfortunately that doesn't seem to be the meaining of the idiom. (We don't have that "do" -- as Stan said, just 'have sex with'. Maybe
his 'kill' sense comes from Mafia movies.)

[Jerry Friedman]

Foreigner, working for cash, no tax, boss of course knows nothing about
it--in my mind that turned into the bosses who are shocked to find out
that their employees aren't allowed to work in America. Then I read
more of your words.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Tony Cooper]

"Doing a foreigner", in my language, can only mean "Having casual sex
with a person from another country".

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

[Mike Barnes]

Like you, I heard it only after I moved to the NW.

--
Mike Barnes
Cheshire, England

[Traddict]

"Charles Bishop" <ctbi...@earthlink.net> a écrit dans le message de groupe
de discussion : ctbishop-87B168...@news.individual.net...

Moonlighting?

>
> --
> charles

[LFS]

I spent my early years in London and I think I've always known the
expression: I'm sure my father used it. The OED entry suggests that it
originated in the services, he was in the RAF.

----
Something done or made at work by an employee purely for his or her own
private benefit; a piece of paid work not declared to the relevant
authorities. Freq. in phr. to do a foreigner. slang (orig. Mil.).

1943 J. L. Hunt & A. G. Pringle Service Slang 33 Such articles [as
models of aircraft], made in the ‘firm's’ time and with the ‘Company's’
material, are called ‘foreigners’, as they are outside the normal work
done by the employee or airman or soldier.

1974 P. Wright Lang. Brit. Industry iii. 34 The term, now rapidly
gaining ground, e.g. among decorators,..doing a foreigner..means working
privately, unknown to the Inland Revenue, to supplement one's regular wage.
1982 Hedges & Beynon Born to Work 75/2 Some people—skilled men
mostly..have ‘foreigners’ (private jobs done in company time) off to a
fine art and make them to order.
1983 A. Bleasdale Shop thy Neighbour xi. 111 We're both gettin'
followed, for all we know, we're both goin' t'get prosecuted f'doin' a
foreigner while we're on the dole.

--
Laura (emulate St George for email)

[Stan Brown]

There are lots of colloquial meanings for "do". Your "doing a 180"
sounds quite normal to my American ears. But I don't see how that
meaning would fit the phrase "doing a foreigner".

[Helen Lacedaemonian]

On Sunday, November 8, 2015 at 11:05:16 AM UTC-8, Stan Brown wrote:
> On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 06:56:13 -0800, Charles Bishop wrote:
> >
> > In article <MPG.30a9251d3...@news.individual.net>,
> > Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, 8 Nov 2015 11:59:57 +0000, the Omrud wrote:
> > > > There are workmen at the house opposite, apparently fitting a new
> > > > bathroom. They started on Saturday morning and they're working through
> > > > Sunday, so we suspect that they are doing a foreigner.
> > > >
> > > > Does this expression travel?
> > >
> > > Never heard it round this manor, Squire.
> > >
> > > The two AmE colloquial meanings of "doing" that might fit are
> > > "killing" and "having sex with".
> >
> > Isn't there one more: performing? "He's doing a one-eighty"
>
> There are lots of colloquial meanings for "do". Your "doing a 180"
> sounds quite normal to my American ears. But I don't see how that
> meaning would fit the phrase "doing a foreigner".

Suppose it were "pulling a foreigner"?

Best,
Helen

[Whiskers]

I read the original report as meaning that people of foreign origin were
being employed to work for hours (and pay?) which native workers would
not accept. Certainly around London, workers from former Soviet Bloc
countries are reputedly harder working and cheaper than their British
counterparts. ('Need some building repairs? Get a Pole'). So the
foreigners are 'being done', ie paid less for working harder than local
workers would tolerate.

[Traddict]

"Stan Brown" <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> a écrit dans le message de groupe
de discussion : MPG.30a966f56...@news.individual.net...

> On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 06:56:13 -0800, Charles Bishop wrote:
>>
>> In article <MPG.30a9251d3...@news.individual.net>,
>> Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>
>> > On Sun, 8 Nov 2015 11:59:57 +0000, the Omrud wrote:
>> > > There are workmen at the house opposite, apparently fitting a new
>> > > bathroom. They started on Saturday morning and they're working
>> > > through
>> > > Sunday, so we suspect that they are doing a foreigner.
>> > >
>> > > Does this expression travel?
>> >
>> > Never heard it round this manor, Squire.
>> >
>> > The two AmE colloquial meanings of "doing" that might fit are
>> > "killing" and "having sex with".
>>
>> Isn't there one more: performing? "He's doing a one-eighty"
>
> There are lots of colloquial meanings for "do". Your "doing a 180"
> sounds quite normal to my American ears. But I don't see how that
> meaning would fit the phrase "doing a foreigner".

As long as you know that "foreigner" refers to a certain type of job, the
phrase is business as usual.

[Cheryl]

I had to read down to find out what it means - it means nothing to me.

We do have lots of people who work "under the table", meaning no tax,
cash payment only, no insurance or guarantee etc., but that has no
implication that the worker is using his or her employer's equipment or
other property without permission. Someone might also work "on the side"
on weekends or evenings, but again, there isn't an implication that
they're doing so using their employer's equipment.

--
Cheryl

[Robin Bignall]

On Sun, 8 Nov 2015 11:59:57 +0000, the Omrud <usenet...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Never encountered it in the east midlands or dahn sowf.
--
Robin Bignall
Herts, England (BrE)

[Tony Cooper]

On Sun, 8 Nov 2015 19:05:46 +0100, "Traddict" <Tradd...@hotmail.fr>
wrote:

As far as I know, "moonlighting" describe only working a second job.
There's no connotation attached to using tools without permission or
working without the knowledge of the boss. However, the boss of the
primary employment may not know about the second job.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Down Here, money under the table is usually a bribe.

Not to be confused with things kept under the counter.

[Tony Cooper]

Men don't "pull" women in the US, so "pulling a foreigner" has a
different meaning in the UK.

[bill van]

In article <5PG%x.81709$bA1....@fx41.am4>,

the Omrud <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:

> There are workmen at the house opposite, apparently fitting a new
> bathroom. They started on Saturday morning and they're working through
> Sunday, so we suspect that they are doing a foreigner.
>

> Does this expression travel? I'm convinced that I never heard it until
> some time after I'd moved to NW England.

I've never heard it in Canadian English, and still don't know what it
means from context or from the first dozen replies or so.

The only thing that came immediately to mind was that someone might be
sleeping with someone from another country, but there was no contextual
support for that.
--
bill

[bill van]

In article <eaev3b9gds4f4ftgk...@4ax.com>,

"Under the table" applies here. The foreign workers are working under
the table, or the job is under the table, meaning that no one involved
in the transaction declares income, pays taxes, or reports to the
appropriate government agencies anything to do with the transaction.

The sum of all such transactions is often called "the underground
economy" here.
--
bill

[Tony Cooper]

On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 14:52:42 -0800, bill van <bil...@delete.shaw.ca>
wrote:

I agree with all points above. A person can be working "under the
table, or paid "under the table", but the usage does not describe a
bribe as someone else brought up.

[Janet]

In article <da954p...@mid.individual.net>, g.d...@btinternet.com
says...

+1 .

Though using work skills in your own time, as a favour for friends or
family, is not necessarily abusing an employer's tools/facilities or
even about getting paid.

I've never heard of "doing a foreigner".

Janet

[Helen Lacedaemonian]

I'm not familiar with this usage. Further information, please.

Best,
Helen

[Tony Cooper]

On Sun, 8 Nov 2015 16:40:30 -0800 (PST), Helen Lacedaemonian

Oh, I'm sure that some man tried to pull you, Helen. Maybe it was a
Welshman or a Englishman, or another foreigner.

[Sam Plusnet]

In article <slrnn3va85.1...@ID-107770.user.individual.net>,
catwh...@operamail.com says...

>

>
> I read the original report as meaning that people of foreign origin were
> being employed to work for hours (and pay?) which native workers would
> not accept. Certainly around London, workers from former Soviet Bloc
> countries are reputedly harder working and cheaper than their British
> counterparts. ('Need some building repairs? Get a Pole'). So the
> foreigners are 'being done', ie paid less for working harder than local
> workers would tolerate.

The phrase doesn't refer to foreign persons, it is the job which is
foreign in that the workmen's employer has no knowledge of the job nor
that much the materials used in it came from his stock.

--
Sam

[Robert Bannister]

On 8/11/2015 8:13 PM, Derek Turner wrote:
> On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 13:09:26 +0100, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>
>> What does it mean?
>
> Working for cash-in-hand, no tax paid and usually using your bosses tools/
> equipment. Your boss, of course, knows nothing about it and would sack
> you if she did.
>
> Certainly has currency in the Midlands.
>

Makes no sense to me. English workmen having been doing stuff like this
since time out of mind, but were especially busy during the two Wars.
The main difference seems to be that the Poles work harder and do a
better job.

--
Robert Bannister
Perth, Western Australia

[Robert Bannister]

So that's what those ads saying "French", "Greek", etc. mean on the shop
window where all the ladies work.

[Charles Bishop]

In article <da9h9b...@mid.individual.net>,

LFS <la...@DRAGONspira.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote:

> On 08/11/2015 11:59, the Omrud wrote:
> > There are workmen at the house opposite, apparently fitting a new
> > bathroom. They started on Saturday morning and they're working through
> > Sunday, so we suspect that they are doing a foreigner.
> >
> > Does this expression travel? I'm convinced that I never heard it until
> > some time after I'd moved to NW England.
> >
>
> I spent my early years in London and I think I've always known the
> expression: I'm sure my father used it. The OED entry suggests that it
> originated in the services, he was in the RAF.
>
> ----
> Something done or made at work by an employee purely for his or her own
> private benefit; a piece of paid work not declared to the relevant
> authorities. Freq. in phr. to do a foreigner. slang (orig. Mil.).
>
> 1943 J. L. Hunt & A. G. Pringle Service Slang 33 Such articles [as
> models of aircraft], made in the ‘firm's’ time and with the ‘Company's’
> material, are called ‘foreigners’, as they are outside the normal work
> done by the employee or airman or soldier.
> 1974 P. Wright Lang. Brit. Industry iii. 34 The term, now rapidly
> gaining ground, e.g. among decorators,..doing a foreigner..means working
> privately, unknown to the Inland Revenue, to supplement one's regular wage.
> 1982 Hedges & Beynon Born to Work 75/2 Some people—skilled men
> mostly..have ‘foreigners’ (private jobs done in company time) off to a
> fine art and make them to order.

This last seems to me mean "foreigners" as objects, from "make them to
order". I can see that in this case a "foreigner" is an object that is
alien to the workplace and will be removed.

> 1983 A. Bleasdale Shop thy Neighbour xi. 111 We're both gettin'
> followed, for all we know, we're both goin' t'get prosecuted f'doin' a
> foreigner while we're on the dole.

--

cgarles, it's speculation, pure and simple

[Charles Bishop]

In article <563f8f2c$0$3872$426a...@news.free.fr>,

Quite possibly, thanks

--
charles

[Charles Bishop]

In article <n1nn70$c7c$1...@news.albasani.net>,
Jerry Friedman <jerry_f...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On 11/8/15 7:13 AM, Derek Turner wrote:
> > On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 05:58:53 -0800, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >
> >> Sounds racist, no? Only "foreigners" would do something underhanded?
> >>
> >> Not even The Donald has suggested anything like that.
> >
> > I don't think so. More 'foreign' to the legitimate business, irregular,
> > outside the normal, I think.
> >
> > FWIW Oxford online has:
> >
> > 2 British informal A piece of work done for private gain without an
> > employer’s permission or without declaration to the relevant authorities.
>
> And the OED's first citation, confirming your suggestion, is

>
> "1943 J. L. Hunt & A. G. Pringle Service Slang 33 Such articles [as
> models of aircraft], made in the ‘firm's’ time and with the ‘Company's’
> material, are called ‘foreigners’, as they are outside the normal work
> done by the employee or airman or soldier."

Again, here, it sounds as if "foreigner" refers to an object rather than
work.

--
charles

[Peter T. Daniels]

Wrong!

[Jerry Friedman]

On 11/8/15 5:29 PM, Janet wrote:
> In article <da954p...@mid.individual.net>, g.d...@btinternet.com
> says...
>>
>> On 08/11/2015 12:13, Derek Turner wrote:
>>> On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 13:09:26 +0100, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>>>
>>>> What does it mean?
>>>
>>> Working for cash-in-hand, no tax paid and usually using your bosses tools/
>>> equipment. Your boss, of course, knows nothing about it and would sack
>>> you if she did.
>>>
>>> Certainly has currency in the Midlands.
>>>
>>
>> I'd say "doing a homer" (nothing to do with the Simpsons!)
>
> +1 .

...

Is that from "home"?

> Though using work skills in your own time, as a favour for friends or
> family, is not necessarily abusing an employer's tools/facilities or
> even about getting paid.

So is a homer misusing one's employer's equipment and supplies, or can
it be any use of work skills on one's own time?

> I've never heard of "doing a foreigner".
>
> Janet
>

--
Jerry Friedman

[Tony Cooper]

You have to further qualify the expression to describe a bribe. "He's
getting paid under the table" means what Mr Bishop said. "He's
getting paid under the table to rig the contract" means he's being
bribed.

The qualification need not be made in the sentence; it can be made in
context. But, the qualification is necessary.

[Peter Moylan]

On 2015-Nov-08 22:59, the Omrud wrote:
> There are workmen at the house opposite, apparently fitting a new
> bathroom. They started on Saturday morning and they're working through
> Sunday, so we suspect that they are doing a foreigner.
>
> Does this expression travel? I'm convinced that I never heard it until
> some time after I'd moved to NW England.

It's known in Australia, but I'm not sure I'd apply it to the situation
you describe. For me, it usually means a job done in a factory or
workshop that's done for someone other than the boss or the company.

If it's a weekend job, off-site, then it's probably not being done on
the boss's payroll, although it might be using the boss's tools.

If the bathroom fixtures were taken from company stocks, that's not a
foreigner, it's straight theft.

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia

[Helen Lacedaemonian]

No doubt, but you must realize I am so used to importunities that I have
an arsenal of responses. Nevertheless, I have no idea what you mean by
"pulling."

Best,
Helen

[Mike Barnes]

Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 2015-Nov-08 22:59, the Omrud wrote:
>> There are workmen at the house opposite, apparently fitting a new
>> bathroom. They started on Saturday morning and they're working through
>> Sunday, so we suspect that they are doing a foreigner.
>>
>> Does this expression travel? I'm convinced that I never heard it until
>> some time after I'd moved to NW England.
>
> It's known in Australia, but I'm not sure I'd apply it to the situation
> you describe. For me, it usually means a job done in a factory or
> workshop that's done for someone other than the boss or the company.

Usually maybe, but not necessarily. I used to do foreigners. I did
programming work for my company's customers outside normal working hours
and was paid directly, when what should have happened is that I would
work in normal hours and be paid through the company. Doing business
direct, the customer paid less and I earned more. But I was misusing the
relationship with the customer that I gained through my employment, so
that was definitely a "foreigner", even though it didn't take place on
the employer's premises or consume any of the employer's materials.

--
Mike Barnes
Cheshire, England

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Sun, 8 Nov 2015 22:06:33 -0700, Jerry Friedman
<jerry_f...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On 11/8/15 5:29 PM, Janet wrote:
>> In article <da954p...@mid.individual.net>, g.d...@btinternet.com
>> says...
>>>
>>> On 08/11/2015 12:13, Derek Turner wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 13:09:26 +0100, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> What does it mean?
>>>>
>>>> Working for cash-in-hand, no tax paid and usually using your bosses tools/
>>>> equipment. Your boss, of course, knows nothing about it and would sack
>>>> you if she did.
>>>>
>>>> Certainly has currency in the Midlands.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'd say "doing a homer" (nothing to do with the Simpsons!)
>>
>> +1 .
>...
>
>Is that from "home"?
>

Not IME. A "homer" is something done in the workplace for personal,
"home", use rather than being part of one's work for the employer.

>> Though using work skills in your own time, as a favour for friends or
>> family, is not necessarily abusing an employer's tools/facilities or
>> even about getting paid.
>
>So is a homer misusing one's employer's equipment and supplies,

Yes.

> or can
>it be any use of work skills on one's own time?
>

No.

>> I've never heard of "doing a foreigner".
>>
>> Janet
>>

--

Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Mon, 09 Nov 2015 00:35:16 -0500, Tony Cooper

In BrE that would probably be "under the counter".

More often "backhander" would be used as a synonym of "bribe":
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/backhander

2 British informal A secret and illegal payment; a bribe:
"a fortune had been paid in backhanders to local officials"

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Sun, 8 Nov 2015 23:01:39 -0800 (PST), Helen Lacedaemonian

The BrE sense I think Tony is referring to is:
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/pull

3.1 British informal Succeed in attracting sexually:
"I used my sense of humour to pull girls"

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Mon, 9 Nov 2015 08:01:13 +0000, Mike Barnes <mikeba...@gmail.com>
wrote:

I had a coworker (at a university) who not only worked privately during
"employment hours", did so on the employer's premises, but apparently
used the address of the building he worked in as his private business
address.

That address misuse is not as strange as it might seem. During its
expansion over the years the university had bought numbers of ordinary
dwelling houses nearby and used them to accomodate various departments
(academic and non-academic). The houses retained their original street
addresses. He worked officially and unofficially in the house at, say,
20 College Park East[1] which was a university property. I'm not sure
whether he was able to have mail delivered to that address or whether he
had to collect it from a post office, but he was using his room in that
house and the address for completely private purposes.

[1] the street name is genuine, the number is not. There are fewer than
20 houses on that short street.

[Janet]

In article <7ed0237e-1cff-43ef...@googlegroups.com>,
helenofs...@gmail.com says...

Slang for a social encounter leading to sex.

Janet.

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Janet skrev:

>> No doubt, but you must realize I am so used to importunities
>> that I have an arsenal of responses. Nevertheless, I have no
>> idea what you mean by "pulling."

> Slang for a social encounter leading to sex.

Surely you are pulling my leg!

--
Bertel, Kolt, Denmark

[Janet]

In article <n1p9ko$sti$2...@news.albasani.net>, jerry_f...@yahoo.com
says...

>
> On 11/8/15 5:29 PM, Janet wrote:
> > In article <da954p...@mid.individual.net>, g.d...@btinternet.com
> > says...
> >>
> >> On 08/11/2015 12:13, Derek Turner wrote:
> >>> On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 13:09:26 +0100, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> What does it mean?
> >>>
> >>> Working for cash-in-hand, no tax paid and usually using your bosses tools/
> >>> equipment. Your boss, of course, knows nothing about it and would sack
> >>> you if she did.
> >>>
> >>> Certainly has currency in the Midlands.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I'd say "doing a homer" (nothing to do with the Simpsons!)
> >
> > +1 .
> ...
>
> Is that from "home"?

Suppose I employ a building company to do some work; one of the
tradesmen they send is particularly helpful or skilled. If I ask him
"Do you do homers?" I'm asking if he also works for his own private
clients in his own time (perfectly legitimate). Both sides understand
that if the answer is yes, and I want to hire him some time in the
future, I should contact him *at home* rather than via his employer.
Also, he would fit in the work around his normal working hours.

> > Though using work skills in your own time, as a favour for friends or
> > family, is not necessarily abusing an employer's tools/facilities or
> > even about getting paid.
>
> So is a homer misusing one's employer's equipment and supplies,

Not necessarily; he might have his own tools and order his own
supplies (or, use the client's equipment and expect the customer to
obtain supplies). "Homers" such as private tuition by a teacher,
professional design, accountancy advice, are purely about personal skill
and experience.

>or can

> it be any use of work skills on one's own time?

Yes.

Janet.

[Whiskers]

Never having encountered that usage, I couldn't make that
interpretation.

--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

I don't know how often the sentence is used in real seduction encounters
but: "Get/Grab your coat, love, you've pulled" is a standard sentence.

The idea is that the two people have met in a public place such as a bar
or club and will leave to go somewhere to have sex. They will put on
their coats when leaving.

I agree with this "Best Answer" explanation:
https://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090324132200AAgOJZw

The sentence has taken on a life of its own.

There are some images here of things with those words on (Google
Images):
http://bit.ly/1MuJAJe

[Jerry Friedman]

Thanks. In that case I used to do homers in your sense--private
tutoring (as we call it). However, they weren't homers in Peter
Duncanson's sense, or foreigners, since I didn't use anything of my
employer's and didn't even come into contact with my customers through
my job.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Tony Cooper]

I know of only two common uses of "homer": a home run in baseball and
a sports announcer.

When a game is broadcast on television or radio, if the play-by-play
announcer makes comments that excessively favor the home team, he is
called a "homer". For example, the umpires or referees make the wrong
call when it is against the home team and the right call when it
favors the home team.

[Janet]

In article <n1q6q4$6l6$1...@dont-email.me>, gade...@lundhansen.dk says...

"So, Bertel, did you pull last night? "

"Only my leg".

bad luck :-)

Janet.

[Janet]

In article <ssa14b1h8iqd6ui9o...@4ax.com>,
ma...@peterduncanson.net says...

"going out on the pull" = going out for the evening, hoping to make a
new conquest.

Janet

[Jerry Friedman]

Question for our British friends: If the boss's tools are used, is that
not theft but twoccing?

--
Jerry Friedman

[Tough Guy no. 1265]

On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 12:13:17 -0000, Derek Turner <frd...@suremail.je> wrote:

> On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 13:09:26 +0100, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>
>> What does it mean?
>
> Working for cash-in-hand, no tax paid and usually using your bosses tools/
> equipment. Your boss, of course, knows nothing about it and would sack
> you if she did.
>
> Certainly has currency in the Midlands.

And how do you know it isn't a company that works 7 days a week? I'm sure I could get a builder out on Sunday if I paid more.

--
Before you set out on a journey, ring your local radio station and say there's a teerrible congestion on your road. Everybody avoids it and it's clear for you! -- Jack Dee

[Tough Guy no. 1265]

On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 11:59:57 -0000, the Omrud <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:

> There are workmen at the house opposite, apparently fitting a new
> bathroom. They started on Saturday morning and they're working through
> Sunday, so we suspect that they are doing a foreigner.
>
> Does this expression travel? I'm convinced that I never heard it until
> some time after I'd moved to NW England.

I'm in Scotland and I thought it involved sexual activity.

99% of builders are Polish, so you can do a foreigner any day of the week :-)

--
Einstein married his cousin, Elsa Lowenthal, after his first marriage failed in 1919.
At the time he stated that he was attracted to Elsa "because she was so well endowed".
He postulated that if you are attracted to women with large breasts, the attraction is even stronger if there is a DNA connection.
This came to be known as.... Einstein's Theory of "Relative Titty."

[Tough Guy no. 1265]

On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 14:39:20 -0000, GordonD <g.d...@btinternet.com> wrote:

> On 08/11/2015 12:13, Derek Turner wrote:

>> On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 13:09:26 +0100, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>>
>>> What does it mean?
>>
>> Working for cash-in-hand, no tax paid and usually using your bosses tools/
>> equipment. Your boss, of course, knows nothing about it and would sack
>> you if she did.
>>
>> Certainly has currency in the Midlands.
>>
>

> I'd say "doing a homer" (nothing to do with the Simpsons!)

I've always heard that phrase meaning using your boss's tools to do a job for a friend, for no pay necessarily. You take the bench saw home from your work and help your neighbour build his patio.

--
For men, the conversation happens in addition to driving
whereas for women the driving is something that happens in addition to the conversation.

[the Omrud]

On 09/11/2015 07:01, Helen Lacedaemonian wrote:

> No doubt, but you must realize I am so used to importunities that I have
> an arsenal of responses. Nevertheless, I have no idea what you mean by
> "pulling."

Man in pub, to woman in pub: "Get your coat, darling, you've pulled".

--
David

[the Omrud]

Twoccing only applies to motor vehicles where it's the TWOC Law you've
broken (Taking WithOut Consent). As you imply, the law was introduced
to have something to charge joy-riders with, as they never intended to
steal the vehicles and so were not guilty of theft.

I'm not sure any law has been broken, assuming that the workmen are
paying tax. They may have broken their terms of employment, but that's
a different matter.

--
David

[GordonD]

My understanding is it's because the person will come to your home to
do the work. Obviously that would be the case anyway with a builder but
the situations I've heard it in involve something like a hairdresser,
who will visit her clients at home to cut their hair. This may or may
not involve using her employer's supplies (hair dye and the like) and
would also be done for cash in hand so the tax man doesn't know.

--
Gordon Davie
Edinburgh, Scotland

[contrex]

When I worked in the repair workshop of a TV rental company in the 1970s, bringing your own or a friends set in to fix using the firm's workbench,test equipment, components, etc, was called "bringing in a foreigner", and was winked at provided you had completed your quota of sets for the day. Often colleagues (and the boss) would share tips e.g. about sets that they were more familiar with than I was, or even do the repair job just for the fun of it.

[Mike Barnes]

Twoccing generally refers to motor vehicles. I wouldn't expect it in
this context.

[musika]

On 09/11/2015 19:47, the Omrud wrote:
> On 09/11/2015 18:09, Jerry Friedman wrote:
>> On Sunday, November 8, 2015 at 10:51:07 PM UTC-7, Peter Moylan wrote:
>>> On 2015-Nov-08 22:59, the Omrud wrote:
>>>> There are workmen at the house opposite, apparently fitting a new
>>>> bathroom. They started on Saturday morning and they're working through
>>>> Sunday, so we suspect that they are doing a foreigner.
>>>>
>>>> Does this expression travel? I'm convinced that I never heard it until
>>>> some time after I'd moved to NW England.
>>>
>>> It's known in Australia, but I'm not sure I'd apply it to the situation
>>> you describe. For me, it usually means a job done in a factory or
>>> workshop that's done for someone other than the boss or the company.
>>>
>>> If it's a weekend job, off-site, then it's probably not being done on
>>> the boss's payroll, although it might be using the boss's tools.
>>>
>>> If the bathroom fixtures were taken from company stocks, that's not a
>>> foreigner, it's straight theft.
>>
>> Question for our British friends: If the boss's tools are used, is that
>> not theft but twoccing?
>
> Twoccing only applies to motor vehicles where it's the TWOC Law you've
> broken (Taking WithOut Consent).

*Taking Without Owner's Consent* I believe, M'Lud.

> As you imply, the law was introduced
> to have something to charge joy-riders with, as they never intended to
> steal the vehicles and so were not guilty of theft.
>
> I'm not sure any law has been broken, assuming that the workmen are
> paying tax. They may have broken their terms of employment, but that's
> a different matter.
>
--

Ray
UK

[Charles Bishop]

In article <FG60y.98143$FN.1...@fx46.am4>,

That doesn't really explain it, but 'sallright, others have. However,
what's the meaning of yours?

The man is insisting the woman accompany him for sex (the man might be
1266)

The man and woman have been flirting, and the man is closing the deal,
to which the woman is amenable

The man and woman know each other and the man is letting her know it's
time to go back home (for sex) to which the woman is amenable.

Or something else?

charles

[Charles Bishop]

In article <4L60y.86523$L65....@fx47.am4>,

the Omrud <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 09/11/2015 18:09, Jerry Friedman wrote:
> > On Sunday, November 8, 2015 at 10:51:07 PM UTC-7, Peter Moylan wrote:
> >> On 2015-Nov-08 22:59, the Omrud wrote:
> >>> There are workmen at the house opposite, apparently fitting a new
> >>> bathroom. They started on Saturday morning and they're working through
> >>> Sunday, so we suspect that they are doing a foreigner.
> >>>
> >>> Does this expression travel? I'm convinced that I never heard it until
> >>> some time after I'd moved to NW England.
> >>
> >> It's known in Australia, but I'm not sure I'd apply it to the situation
> >> you describe. For me, it usually means a job done in a factory or
> >> workshop that's done for someone other than the boss or the company.
> >>
> >> If it's a weekend job, off-site, then it's probably not being done on
> >> the boss's payroll, although it might be using the boss's tools.
> >>
> >> If the bathroom fixtures were taken from company stocks, that's not a
> >> foreigner, it's straight theft.
> >
> > Question for our British friends: If the boss's tools are used, is that
> > not theft but twoccing?
>
> Twoccing only applies to motor vehicles where it's the TWOC Law you've
> broken (Taking WithOut Consent). As you imply, the law was introduced
> to have something to charge joy-riders with, as they never intended to
> steal the vehicles and so were not guilty of theft.

This seems illogical to me, but apparently not to those where the law
was made, so I just mention it.

Theft is taking something without permission. I don't know, but I would
think it would GTA (Grand Theft Auto) here even if the intention was to
joy-ride and then leave it somewhere. What if the joy ride lasted a year
or so?

>
> I'm not sure any law has been broken, assuming that the workmen are
> paying tax. They may have broken their terms of employment, but that's
> a different matter.

Charles

[Tony Cooper]

The man is attempting to close the deal by assumption of assent.

[Janet]

In article <f1abeaf9-2482-4324...@googlegroups.com>,
jerry_f...@yahoo.com says...

AFAIK twocking is only used about vehicles.

Janet

[Janet]

In article <ctbishop-308F52...@news.individual.net>,
ctbi...@earthlink.net says...

In UK, it's more specific. The legal definition is

"Basic definition of theft.

(1)A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property
belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the
other of it; and “thief” and “steal” shall be construed accordingly."

' with the intention of permantly depriving' doesn't apply to tools
borrowed from work then returned; or to kid joyriders.

Janet

[Helen Lacedaemonian]

On Monday, November 9, 2015 at 3:29:53 PM UTC-8, Tony Cooper wrote:
> On Mon, 09 Nov 2015 14:57:55 -0800, Charles Bishop
> <ctbi...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >In article <FG60y.98143$FN.1...@fx46.am4>,
> > the Omrud <usenet...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 09/11/2015 07:01, Helen Lacedaemonian wrote:
> >>
> >> > No doubt, but you must realize I am so used to importunities that I have
> >> > an arsenal of responses. Nevertheless, I have no idea what you mean by
> >> > "pulling."
> >>
> >> Man in pub, to woman in pub: "Get your coat, darling, you've pulled".
> >
> >That doesn't really explain it, but 'sallright, others have. However,
> >what's the meaning of yours?
> >
> >The man is insisting the woman accompany him for sex (the man might be
> >1266)
> >
> >The man and woman have been flirting, and the man is closing the deal,
> >to which the woman is amenable
> >
> >The man and woman know each other and the man is letting her know it's
> >time to go back home (for sex) to which the woman is amenable.
> >
> >Or something else?
>

> The man is attempting to close the deal by assumption of assent.

The phrasing strikes me as creepy: am I the only one? It sounds to me
like he's saying, "I know you're out here trolling for sex, and lucky you,
you've caught a live one." Ick!

Best,
Helen

[Robert Bannister]

On 9/11/2015 7:26 PM, Peter Duncanson [BrE] wrote:

> On Sun, 8 Nov 2015 23:01:39 -0800 (PST), Helen Lacedaemonian
> <helenofs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sunday, November 8, 2015 at 5:09:48 PM UTC-8, Tony Cooper wrote:
>>> On Sun, 8 Nov 2015 16:40:30 -0800 (PST), Helen Lacedaemonian
>>> <helenofs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sunday, November 8, 2015 at 1:55:49 PM UTC-8, Tony Cooper wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 8 Nov 2015 11:31:31 -0800 (PST), Helen Lacedaemonian
>>>>> <helenofs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sunday, November 8, 2015 at 11:05:16 AM UTC-8, Stan Brown wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 06:56:13 -0800, Charles Bishop wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In article <MPG.30a9251d3...@news.individual.net>,
>>>>>>>> Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 8 Nov 2015 11:59:57 +0000, the Omrud wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> There are workmen at the house opposite, apparently fitting a new
>>>>>>>>>> bathroom. They started on Saturday morning and they're working through
>>>>>>>>>> Sunday, so we suspect that they are doing a foreigner.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Does this expression travel?
>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> Never heard it round this manor, Squire.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The two AmE colloquial meanings of "doing" that might fit are
>>>>>>>>> "killing" and "having sex with".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Isn't there one more: performing? "He's doing a one-eighty"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There are lots of colloquial meanings for "do". Your "doing a 180"
>>>>>>> sounds quite normal to my American ears. But I don't see how that
>>>>>>> meaning would fit the phrase "doing a foreigner".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Suppose it were "pulling a foreigner"?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Men don't "pull" women in the US, so "pulling a foreigner" has a
>>>>> different meaning in the UK.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> I'm not familiar with this usage. Further information, please.
>>>>
>>> Oh, I'm sure that some man tried to pull you, Helen. Maybe it was a
>>> Welshman or a Englishman, or another foreigner.
>>

>> No doubt, but you must realize I am so used to importunities that I have
>> an arsenal of responses. Nevertheless, I have no idea what you mean by
>> "pulling."
>>

>> Best,
>> Helen
>
> The BrE sense I think Tony is referring to is:
> http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/pull
>
> 3.1 British informal Succeed in attracting sexually:
> "I used my sense of humour to pull girls"
>
>
I would suggest there is bit more than just attraction and that it
usually implies taking them home (her place or yours or elsewhere) with
a strong hint of getting some.

--
Robert Bannister
Perth, Western Australia

[Charles Bishop]

In article <MPG.30ab554...@news.individual.net>,

Fair enough. Would the police accept the word of someone in a car not
their own that he was just joyriding and intended to abandon the car?

Also, joyrider steals a car and leaves it parked legally with no
intention of using it again. If someone else steals the car, is the
joyrider also guilty of a crime?

Sounds like a law class, but I'm curious.

--
charles

[Charles Bishop]

In article <63622401-42fa-4bb5...@googlegroups.com>,

That was my reason for the questions, but I can see it as slang with
understood meanings between the parties that I don't get.

--
charles

[Tony Cooper]

Yep, that's pretty much the way of it. I don't think it's at all
surprising that there are men out there that have exactly that
attitude.

[Jerry Friedman]

It's almost closing time. The man walks up to the woman, who he's never
met, and says "Get your coat, love, you're pulled." If she is looking
for sex, she might decide he's the best she's going to get. If she says
no, he hasn't wasted any time or money, so the only cost to him is that
she might be offended, and I don't think he's worried about that.

Or so I've heard. I don't know of any real case where anyone's used an
unadorned line like that.

"Do you want to get a six-pack and go fuck, or don't you drink?"

--
Jerry Friedman

[Helen Lacedaemonian]

However, it is surprising that it ever works. This turn of the thread
is reminding me of our discussion some weeks ago on "negging."
I can't decide if the whole thing is some fanciful media construct or
the result of rampant (but real) poor self-esteem.

Best,
Helen

[Robert Bannister]

On 9/11/2015 12:16 PM, Charles Bishop wrote:
> In article <da9h9b...@mid.individual.net>,
> LFS <la...@DRAGONspira.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote:

>
>> On 08/11/2015 11:59, the Omrud wrote:
>>> There are workmen at the house opposite, apparently fitting a new
>>> bathroom. They started on Saturday morning and they're working through
>>> Sunday, so we suspect that they are doing a foreigner.
>>>
>>> Does this expression travel? I'm convinced that I never heard it until
>>> some time after I'd moved to NW England.
>>>
>>

>> I spent my early years in London and I think I've always known the
>> expression: I'm sure my father used it. The OED entry suggests that it
>> originated in the services, he was in the RAF.

I first learnt it as "pull a bird" which dates it to the early sixties,
I think, or at least my experience of the expression.

[Robert Bannister]

On 10/11/2015 7:01 AM, Charles Bishop wrote:

> Theft is taking something without permission. I don't know, but I would
> think it would GTA (Grand Theft Auto) here even if the intention was to
> joy-ride and then leave it somewhere. What if the joy ride lasted a year
> or so?

They rarely last long. Either it's a genuine joy ride or the car is
neeed in pursuance of a theft. If you are the owner, you are only glad
if they recover the car before the "joy riders" have driven it into the
bush and set light to it to destroy fingerprints and DNA traces.

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

the Omrud skrev:

> I'm not sure any law has been broken, assuming that the workmen
> are paying tax. They may have broken their terms of
> employment, but that's a different matter.

A little pedantic:

If they break an agreement, they have broken the law about
agreements - which I assume exists in all reasonable countries.

--
Bertel, Kolt, Denmark

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Charles Bishop skrev:

>> Twoccing only applies to motor vehicles where it's the TWOC Law you've
>> broken (Taking WithOut Consent). As you imply, the law was introduced
>> to have something to charge joy-riders with, as they never intended to
>> steal the vehicles and so were not guilty of theft.

> This seems illogical to me, but apparently not to those where the law
> was made, so I just mention it.

> Theft is taking something without permission.

Not under Danish law it isn't. It's not theft without the
intention of benefitting financially (in a broad sense) -
yourself or others.

We have the concept of "theft of use" which corresponds to TWOC -
but it applies to any object.

> I don't know, but I would think it would GTA (Grand Theft Auto)
> here even if the intention was to joy-ride and then leave it
> somewhere. What if the joy ride lasted a year or so?

Then it is ordinary theft. The intention is then to save money.

No, I won't try to draw any line. That is for the judge to do in
a specific case.

--
Bertel, Kolt, Denmark

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Charles Bishop skrev:

> Fair enough. Would the police accept the word of someone in a
> car not their own that he was just joyriding and intended to
> abandon the car?

When in doubt assume theft, subsidiaryly [1] TWOC, and then let
the judge decide.

[1] In Denmark at least the police will accuse you of a serious
crime and then specifiy a milder one in case the first one is
dismissed by the judge. That way the person will not go free of a
minor crime because the serious charge did not hold.

Is the word (subsidiaryly) used correctly?
Is this done likewise by the police in other countries?

> Also, joyrider steals a car and leaves it parked legally with no
> intention of using it again. If someone else steals the car, is the
> joyrider also guilty of a crime?

No. No crime without intention.

If he tells his buddy about the car with a broken door lock, that
is of accessory to the crime besides his own crime of joyriding.

> Sounds like a law class, but I'm curious.

I like legal stuff. I was lucky because there was a course about
internet relevant law as part of the computer course I took. I
subscribe to the Danish usenet group about law, but unfortunately
the traffic has dwindled.

--
Bertel, Kolt, Denmark

[Peter Moylan]

On 2015-Nov-10 12:14, Janet wrote:

> In UK, it's more specific. The legal definition is
>
> "Basic definition of theft.
>
> (1)A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property
> belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the
> other of it; and “thief” and “steal” shall be construed accordingly."
>
> ' with the intention of permantly depriving' doesn't apply to tools
> borrowed from work then returned; or to kid joyriders.

So if I take your television set with the intention of returning it to
you in a couple of years, that's not stealing?

It sounds like a definition that's asking for trouble.

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia

[the Omrud]

Yes. It's a joke. Nobody really says that.

--
David

[the Omrud]

*With the intent to permanently deprive the owner*. That's why
joy-riding is not theft.

I would have to check, but I suspect that theft is a common-law offence
with its origins in the mists of English history.

--
David

[the Omrud]

>> other of it; and “thief†and “steal†shall be construed accordingly."

>>
>> ' with the intention of permantly depriving' doesn't apply to tools
>> borrowed from work then returned; or to kid joyriders.
>
> Fair enough. Would the police accept the word of someone in a car not
> their own that he was just joyriding and intended to abandon the car?

Possibly, but he's almost certainly driving without insurance, so he's
broken some laws.

> Also, joyrider steals a car and leaves it parked legally with no
> intention of using it again. If someone else steals the car, is the
> joyrider also guilty of a crime?

Yes, because of the TWOC law. Previously, he could possibly be charged
with theft of petrol.

--
David

[the Omrud]

You would find it very difficult to persuade a court that you honestly
had this intention.

--
David

[the Omrud]

Absolutely not. A breach of contracts is a civil matter and nothing to
do with laws. Nobody can be prosecuted or given a conviction for
breaking his terms of employment, but he could be sacked.

For example, I must not take up a second job without approval of my
employer. There's nothing illegal about having two jobs, but I could be
dismissed for breaking my employment contract.

In some companies, it's against the rules to disclose your salary to
other staff. That's entirely legal, but you could lose your job.

--
David

[John Ritson]

In article <ctbishop-308F52...@news.individual.net>, Charles
Bishop <ctbi...@earthlink.net> writes

"THEFT ACT 1968

1. Basic definition of theft
(1) A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property

belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the
other of it; and ‘thief’ and ‘steal’ shall be construed accordingly."

--
John Ritson

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

I think that is implied by "*Succeed* in attracting...".

--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

It isn't as bad as that. The only times I've overheard someone use the
sentence it has been playful, part of flirting, and was not used as a
conversation starter.

If it were used very early in a conversation it might be something like:

A: <smiling> Hello.

B: <smiling> Hello.

A: <smiling> Get your coat, darling, you've pulled.

It would only work, in the sense of not bringing the conversation to an
abrupt end, if A speaks in an obviously humorous and unthreatening
manner.

The "...you've pulled" statement should be clearly intended as humorous
hyperbole used as part of a flirty conversation. It is an indication of
interest rather than a command.

B might reply, smiling: "I haven't finished my drink".

By responding in that way B would be not ruling our the possibility of
sex *later*, but indicating that he/she wishes to continue drinking and
talking.

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

That definition doesn't stand by itself. There is more in the relevant
Act.

Information from legal experts:
http://www.inbrief.co.uk/offences/required-intention-for-theft.htm

Intention to permanently deprive

Section 6 (1) of the Theft Act[1] provides that a person will be
treated as having the necessary intention to permanently deprive if
they treat the property as their own regardless of the rights of the
owners.

This will therefore apply in the situations where the defendant
intends to return the property to the owner.

That would seem to cover the case of taking a television set with the
intent of returning it in a couple of years. The taker would be treating
it as his/her own during those two years and would therefore be guilty
of theft.

[1]
Section 6(1) of the Theft Act 1968:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/60/section/6

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Mon, 9 Nov 2015 13:21:10 -0800 (PST), contrex
<mike.j...@gmail.com> wrote:

>When I worked in the repair workshop of a TV rental company in the 1970s, bringing your own or a friends set in to fix using the firm's workbench,test equipment, components, etc, was called "bringing in a foreigner", and was winked at provided you had completed your quota of sets for the day. Often colleagues (and the boss) would share tips e.g. about sets that they were more familiar with than I was, or even do the repair job just for the fun of it.
>

In the case you describe "foreigner" is particularly apt as the TV set
is foreign in the sense of not being the property of the TV rental
company.

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Peter Moylan skrev:

> So if I take your television set with the intention of returning it to
> you in a couple of years, that's not stealing?

> It sounds like a definition that's asking for trouble.

Judging accused people's intention is what judges and jurors are
paid for (though not the same amount).

--
Bertel, Kolt, Denmark

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

the Omrud skrev:

>> A little pedantic:

>> If they break an agreement, they have broken the law about
>> agreements - which I assume exists in all reasonable countries.

> Absolutely not. A breach of contracts is a civil matter and nothing to
> do with laws.

Hm. In Danish law there is a rule that (very simplified) says
that you must keep your word. If I break an agreement, I have
broken that law.

The consequences are not a matter of law.

--
Bertel, Kolt, Denmark

[Janet]

In article <ctbishop-560952...@news.individual.net>,

> > other of it; and “thief†and “steal†shall be construed accordingly."

> >
> > ' with the intention of permantly depriving' doesn't apply to tools
> > borrowed from work then returned; or to kid joyriders.
>
> Fair enough. Would the police accept the word of someone in a car not
> their own that he was just joyriding and intended to abandon the car?

If it was a thirteen yr old, I would imagine yes.

>
> Also, joyrider steals a car and leaves it parked legally with no
> intention of using it again. If someone else steals the car, is the
> joyrider also guilty of a crime?

might be "aggravated taking"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TWOC#Elements_of_the_offence

Janet.