Cutting asbestos corrugated sheets
JakeD
I need to trim the overhang off some corrugated asbestos sheets which form
the roof of my garage. I could do it with my 9" angle grinder, but it would
no doubt generate a lot of asbestos dust, which I understand is hazardous.
Can anyone give me any advice on how I should do it?
Thank you
Jake
Phil
Paul - xxx
Tyvek overalls, PPE and RPE plus damping for dust and isolation of any
released dust such that it stays within the immediate area would make
it pretty much a specialised job .. unless you don't care!
If it's only a small area, say just one sheet, I wouldn't use a
grinder, I'd use a coping saw and do it slowly by hand, still damping
down and still wearing PPE and RPE.
It's likely it'd be easier to remove the sheets as whole sheets and
replace with correctly sized tin/plastic sheets.
(Only a few days ago I was on an 'asbestos awareness' day course ..
nasty stuff.)
The above, of course, is ignoring the reason for such an overhang in
the first place .. ;)
--
Paul - xxx
Una vita - vitate
Paul - xxx
> JakeD wrote:
>
> >
> > I need to trim the overhang off some corrugated asbestos sheets
> > which form the roof of my garage. I could do it with my 9" angle
> > grinder, but it would no doubt generate a lot of asbestos dust,
> > which I understand is hazardous.
> >
> > Can anyone give me any advice on how I should do it?
>
> Just don't.
It's not so much the dust you need to prepare for, it's the fibres,
microns thin and a few microns long they can enter the body by both
inhalation and through the skin, so if you don't cover yourself
properly you're asking for potential trouble. It also takes 15 years
or more for symptoms to show, they're cumulative and once the fibres
get into the lungs they cannot be removed ...
Be careful whatever you do with it, please!
tony sayer
<notchec...@hotmail.com> scribeth thus
I thought the Blu and Brown were the nasty ones?..
--
Tony Sayer
Paul - xxx
Yep, they are now all considered dangerous.
From HSE A0 asbestos essentials ..
Blue asbestos (Crocidolite) had a voluntary ban in 1970
Blue and Brown asbestos (Amosite) were banned by law in 1985
Uses of White asbestos (Chrysotile) were banned in 1999
Everything else, and most second-jand supply (except for very high
performance materials) was banned in 2000.
......
Check www.hse.gov.uk/asbestos/licensing.htm etc .. there are product
sheets avilable for non-licensed work, detailing how it is recommended
to be carried out, Task sheets A0 to A38 .. they all relate to
replacing or simply removing complete asbestos sheets, there's nothing
about cutting the sheets, which is not now recommended so worksheets
aren't (or shouldn't be) available for this task!
Paul - xxx
Peter Crosland
Under no circumstances should you attempt to do this yourself. You need to
get the job done by a specialist company who are authorised to do the work.
Attempting to do it yourself would put yourself, your family and other
people in danger.
Peter Crosland
Peter Parry
<g6...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>Under no circumstances should you attempt to do this yourself. You need to
>get the job done by a specialist company who are authorised to do the work.
Working with asbestos cement sheet is a non licensed task and does not
require the services of a specialist asbestos scam company.
The risk from asbestos is not the same for all types and all
materials, there is also a strong dose/exposure/risk relationship.
While all types are considered to be potentially harmful, asbestos
cement sheet has about the lowest risk of all.
If you really must cut the sheet do it using a hand saw with water
running over the cutting area. A better approach would however be to
remove the sheet and replace it with one of the correct length in
another material.
>Attempting to do it yourself would put yourself, your family and other
>people in danger.
The chances of harm happening with a single brief exposure to asbestos
cement dust even if cut dry with an angle grinder whilst not zero are
insignificant.
Cash
Jake,
If you *MUST* cut it and it's the old asbetos cement sheets, then forget
power tools and use the simplest, easiest and safest way by using one the
readily available multi-purpose handsaws (that will cut wood, aluminium
etc).
Use a facemask designed to prevent the passing of asbestos fibres, stick on
some disposable overalls, keep the area clear of children - and the odd nosy
adults - (unless the adults are there to help [helpers should wear PPE as
well]), mark where you want to cut and carry on with the handsaw. Do not
let the offcuts drop and break.
When all is done, clean the area as thoroughly as possible (using whatever
is the best means) and seal all the waste (and used PPE) in heavy duty
plastic and take it to the nearest local authorities official disposal
point.
*NOTE* - whilst asbestos fibres are dangerous, the levels of the stuff in
the old asbestos cement sheets is usually well below 15% and is safe enough
to work if done sensibly.
Those that think that this is dangerous and would post rather vociferous
replies (which will be ignored) be aware that I have dealt with this stuff
for many years and this was the then recommended way of having to work with
the stuff and its disposal [1] - after laboratory analysis to confirm the
asbestos type. (other types of asbestos are far more dangerous and I would
certainly advise professional intervention for the working and removal of
that).
[1] It's always better to remove this stuff without cutting or breaking
the sheets etc, and I advocate this - but for the average DiYer there are
times when this is just not possible for any number of reasons and common
sense must then prevail, especially as on jobs such as this, as the cost of
bringing in the professionals is rather exorbitant.
Cash
Paranoia not accepted here - but common sense is.
Cash
Peter,
That advice is simply not practical (nor extremely dangerous) for the small
jobs that the DiYers are usually involved in when using the old asbetos
cement sheets which usually contain far less than 15% of least harmful
chrysotile asbestos fibres.
Cash
Andy Dingley
> Under no circumstances should you attempt to do this yourself.
Agreed - those sheets are brittle and they do take two to handle.
Otherwise, go and sit with Dennis until it's time to have your nappies
changed.
Peter Crosland
news:9fge2r...@mid.individual.net...
Unless you have personal knowledge of the sheets the OP has then you cannot
be sure. It is obvious that the OP has no comprehension of the danger he
might cause, or be in. The bottom line is you just cannot afford to take
changes with asbestos. It would be grossly irresponsible for the OP to
proceed with without qualified professional advice.
Peter Crosland
ARWadsworth
It's people like you that give good sound advice that can cause such a
thing:-)
--
Adam
Andy Dingley
> power tools and use the simplest, easiest and safest way by using one the
> readily available multi-purpose handsaws (that will cut wood, aluminium
> etc).
Saw should be a wood saw (middling large teeth) with induction-
hardened teeth. Cheap from anywhere. Don't use power tools - angle
grinders make more dust than saws, most power saws have a big risk of
cracking the sheets.
The respirator should be a half-face with a rubber mask, not just
paper (15-20 for a 3M disposable, or you can get one with replaceable
filters). It should also reach level 3 for particulates, not just the
usual level 2.
Wear a disposable boilersuit with a hair cover and ideally shoe covers
too (try a car painting place). Anything you wore underneath goes
straight in the wash, as do you - especially hair.
If you need to drill it, use Bosch multi-construction bits (carbide
tips that don't wear down, but sharp too)
Keep a garden sprayer handy to wet down anything you're working on, or
that you've worked around. Control any dust by keeping it
continuously wet, collect it and bag it while it's still wet. Big
hosepipe job afterwards.
Read the HSE website, they have sensible guidance.
The Natural Philosopher
dust: That deals with it.
Andy Dingley
> Unless you have personal knowledge of the sheets the OP has then you cannot
> be sure.
I can, I've got a big shiny new microscope with _lots_ of polarisers
(well, 1980s, but I didn't have to pay for it). I can even go through
the gf's skip of mixed diamonds and sort the moissanite from the CZ
from the real stuff.
Otherwise, anything shiny surfaced, electrical, insulating, dark in
colour or '50s decorative panels, should be treated as crocidolite
(bad). Anything cheap,hard, white, rough surface and used for roofing
is just chrysotile (not so bad).
Peter Parry
<g6...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>Unless you have personal knowledge of the sheets the OP has then you cannot
>be sure.
Correct, there must be a 0.0001% chance someone decided a really neat
idea would be to have a roof sheet made just for them from Amphibole
rather than Serpentine group asbestos. Asbestos cement made with
chrysotile was the most common roofing material used - why would it be
anything else?
Even if it was the single event exposure risk is minimal. While it is
theoretically possible for a single fibre exposure to cause asbestos
related illness, asbestos exposure becomes a health concern when high
concentrations of asbestos fibers are inhaled over a long time period.
Disease is very unlikely to result from a single, high-level exposure,
or from a short period of exposure to lower levels. Most people in
the UK breath asbestos fibres every day.
>It is obvious that the OP has no comprehension of the danger he
>might cause, or be in.
In that he is obviously not the only one.
>The bottom line is you just cannot afford to take changes with asbestos.
It isn't taking any more chance than crossing a road. It is
ridiculous scaremongering to conflate low and high risk materials and
activities and say they should be treated the same. That is what
creates real risk - people don't take any notice of the warnings on
really dangerous things because they see so many unimportant ones.
The Natural Philosopher
Hear hear peter!
Your chances of dying from radiation induced cancer are about 1,000,000
times greater from lying on a sunbed than living next to a power staion.
Guess which scares people more.
Cash
(and gutters) of this stuff over many years, I am certain that if the sheets
are as the OP describes, they are safe enough to handle without the
intervention of specialists etc - in the years that I was sending samples
off for analysis, not one sample ever reached 15% let alone exceeded it.
As for "grossly irresponsible for proceeding without qualified professional
advice" - that's what many so-called professionals say, often for their own
ends.
I once dealt with a so-called "professional asbestos remover", who knew a
damn sight less about the stuff that I did at the time, and if I'd taken his
advice, then a number of employees could have been placed in danger - I rest
my case on that one m'lud!
Cash
Cash
Might keep him quiet for a week or two! LOL
Cash
The problem is, water can also pose a danger on an asbetos roof for the
uninitiated by causing a "slip" hazard, and cause someone to slip off the
crawling boards (a must on such a roof) and fall through the stuff - causing
rather a lot of pain and suffering in the process (worst case scenario not
mentioned due to causing possible offence here ;-) )
That's why I don't advise using it at roof level.
Cash
Peter Crosland
So you draw a conclusion on the basis of a single case that all contractors
are rogues. Handling the sheets may be quite safe but attacking them with
an angle grinder or the like would not be wise. In any case the OP would be
very unwise to proceed solely on the basis of advice given on a NG.
Furthermore chrysotile may be the least dangerous of the various asbestos
types but nevertheless it is the most common cause of pleural mesothelioma
so to call it safe is simply untrue.
Peter Crosland
Peter Parry
<g6...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>So you draw a conclusion on the basis of a single case that all contractors
>are rogues.
reasons go back to the first licensing regime and the effective
issuing of a small number of licences to print money. There is also
little doubt that few will give objective reliable advice.
>Furthermore chrysotile may be the least dangerous of the various asbestos
>types but nevertheless it is the most common cause of pleural mesothelioma
>so to call it safe is simply untrue.
it can be deadly. A single exposure however is most unlikely to pose
any significant risk. It is only the most common cause (if indeed
this is so) because it is also the most commonly used form by a large
margin.
andrew
> There is little doubt that many asbestos contractors are rogues. The
> reasons go back to the first licensing regime and the effective
> issuing of a small number of licences to print money. There is also
> little doubt that few will give objective reliable advice.
I think this is true of many of the restrictive practices that have been
enabled by health and safety legislation whether it be gas installations,
part P, loler, puwer or trade certificates like cpcs, nptc linkup etc.
Licences to work like in medieval times. They often appear to be forms of
pyramid selling to me.
AJH
Cash
Peter,
I have no wish to go down the "ridiculous road" on this subject, as health
and safety "mentality" has now turned from the ethos of "health and safety"
to protect those that are working for rogue employers (and to protect the
public in general) to an "I'm going to protect my arse even to the detriment
of common sense and pure fright of being sued" mentality.
But I will say that:-
You get rogue contractors just the same as you get rogue lawyers, builders,
doctors et al - and in most cases you judge the whole profession on just one
instance - even you I bet.
Using your argument, would you consider the cutting of stone, brick,
concrete, mdf and even timber safe?
If you do, then you are very wrong - the dust from those creates both a
health risk (lung problems for the first four) and a risk of explosion and
fire from the last - and those are just a few, I won't cover paints,
thinners, fire retardant coatings, sharp tools and objects, power tools et
al.
Would you advocate calling the "professionals" to handle those? I doubt it!
Let's keep things in perspective and use some common sense - after all, most
competent DiYer's have a great deal of that, but many (including lawyers,
politicians etc) lack even a basic level of it.
As for me calling asbestos "safe" - then you have interpreted that yourself,
what I actually posted was "they are safe enough to handle without the
intervention of specialists etc" which they are if adequate PPE and cleaning
precautions are observed by the *occasional* do-it-yourselfer (and *THAT* is
what we are talking about here and not the people using it day in and day
out).
As I said in my original post "Paranoia not accepted here - but common sense
is" - and *PARANOIA* is the crux of the matter.
Cash
Grimly Curmudgeon
<g6...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>Under no circumstances should you attempt to do this yourself. You need to
>get the job done by a specialist company who are authorised to do the work.
>Attempting to do it yourself would put yourself, your family and other
>people in danger.
Paul - xxx
Not necessarily.
In general I agree it's a job not to be done regularly by DIYers, but
even the H&S site has worksheets available for download to pass on best
practice for non-licensed removal of Asbestos sheeting etc .. see my
posts with some details .. but for a one-off job it _is_ a task that
can be done within reasonably safe parameters. ;)
Personally I wouldn't cut the sheets, I'd replace them .. ;)
Peter Crosland
news:nrm697lekb68gm51u...@4ax.com...
are rogues or is this just an opinion of yours? Saying that few will give
objective advice sounds like bigotry to me. If you actually do have some
evidence then please explain what it is. As for the risks of exposure to
asbestos there is no safe level. Of course the risk is increased by long
term regular exposure but that does not mean that a single exposure can be
considered safe.
Peter Crosland
Peter Crosland
> As for me calling asbestos "safe" - then you have interpreted that
> yourself, what I actually posted was "they are safe enough to handle
> without the
> intervention of specialists etc" which they are if adequate PPE and
> cleaning precautions are observed by the *occasional* do-it-yourselfer
> (and *THAT* is what we are talking about here and not the people using it
> day in and day out).
Which is the essence of why I urged caution to the OP. It seemed evident to
me that the OP had no experience whatsoever of handling, or working with, a
potentially dangerous material. If, and I emphasise the if, the appropriate
precautions are observed then I agree that there should not be a problem.
Unfortunately in my experience many workers, both DIY and small builders,
simply don't know or even care about the dangers they may expose themselves
or others to. This applies not only to handling potentially hazardous
materials such as asbestos but also to safe working practices. Sadly common
sense is a very scarce commodity.
Peter Crosland
The Natural Philosopher
There is a simple rule with asbestos. Don't inhale, and particularly
don't inhale blue, or large quantities. Over a long period of time.
All these lung conditions boil down to a simple set of conditions:
provided your lungs don't pack up before you die of something else, some
damage in a life is inevitable, and not an issue.
What one strives to prevent is overwhelming the bodies natural defences,
either through chronic high exposure, or by dint of other underlying
conditions like asthma or heavy smoking which inhibit the ability to
produce phlegm and cough the crap up and out.
If the ability to clear the crap is inhibited, the crap will stay, and
the body may then start to react to isolate it by forming cysts or
cancers, or simply swelling enough to inhibit air passage at all: At
that point the lungs are also prone to infections, which exacerbate the
whole thing.
All the asbestos related illnesses come from industries where prolonged
high exposure to the dust caused measurable impacts on health, and just
as is the case with radiation, we only have data points from these cases
of high and prolonged exposure. And just as with radiation, the simplest
thing to do is to draw a straight line, origin zero, zero between those
points we have, and say 'the only safe asbestos exposure is no exposure
at all' .
This may form the basis for health and safety rules in both the asbestos
and the nuclear industry guidelines, but it is not a fact, it is an
extrapolation from a crude bit of - not even curve fitting - but
straight line fitting.
If people have their lungs full of water, they drown. If people get half
their lungs full of water maybe half of them drown and half managed to
cough it all up and be more or less all right. If you inhale a teaspoon
of coffee, you do not die at all. You choke and cough it up.
Should we therefore say that 'no one should drink coffee, in case they
inhale a teaspoon, because statistically if they inhale a gallon, they
will die, ergo the chances of them dying from a spoonful (a thousandth
of a gallon) is one in a thousand, which is still not safe'?
The chances of dying in a road accident are about one in 20,000 in any
given year. The only safe way is never to go near a road at all.
The same can be said of hospital infections.
I.e. the point to make is that health and safety, in the absence of
certainty, is extremely conservative, and, one can say, simplistic in
its approach to risk. There is a lot to be said in favour of that, in
the sense that eliminating asbestos from the environment is not a great
cost by and large, and may at least benefit the work forces that dealt
with it on a daily basis.
There is however very little evidence that low exposure over a short
period or prolonged ultra low exposure, does any harm whatsoever.
Just as there is with radiation. We are to a large extent self repairing
organisms. As long as that ability is not exceeded, most low level
exposure to lots of things, gets repaired.
With asbestos, the key is not to inhale large quantities of the fibres
and dust. A face mask and wetting the area down is all it takes.
And to be frank, as one who grew up surrounded by asbestos, that is
probably overkill.
I have suffred far more from cement dust inhalation.
Cash
Draw your horns in and stop being bloody officious.
Now let's get down to the nitty-gritty, *YOU* made that suggestion of rogue
contractors in one of your rather bumptious replies to one of my posts
<quote> So you draw a conclusion on the basis of a single case that all
contractors are rogues.<unquote> where I had said <quote> I once dealt
less about the stuff that I did at the time, and if I'd taken his advice,
then a number of employees could have been placed in danger - I rest my case
al - and in most cases you judge the whole profession on just one instance -
I won't ask where you stand in that list, but I have obviously hurt a
tender spot in questioning your revered opinion.
*YOU* started the rogue contractor line, no I - so sod-off on that one and
start arguing about with yourself - you sound like a typical legal bod!
Now with the exposure risk of asbestos, your obvious lack of training in the
usage removal of the stuff has polarised your view down to that of the
purely theoretical "WHAT IF" stance - a stance that you could project to
that of developing cancers from the carcinogens in unleaded fuel whilst
filling up your car with the stuff - there is a risk, but does that stop you
doing it? Presuming of course that you own a motorised vehicle.
Please, stop portraying the high-flying lawyer and get your feet back on the
ground.
Now as you seem to be stuck on the health issue of this stuff - dig into
whatever information you have and let me know the age groups in which the
majority of cancers have developed, the years in which those people worked
with the stuff and the protection that they were (not) issued with or even
used if they were.
That information will put into perspective the health risks of toadies
generation of asbestos - minimal in 30 to 60 years time.
Good day to you
Cash
Cash
Now do you have the information to back up all those statements, or is it
simply your polarised thinking of what *YOU* *believe* to be fact?
So how much *practical* experience do you have in using *any* asbestos? I
have had both the theoretical training on its use, safety and disposal, used
and installed the stuff - and also removed it.
In fact, the "scarcity of common sense" these days is due to people just
like you who are preventing those who have it, from using it!! Put simply,
scaremongering.
Cash
John Rumm
> "Cash"<.............\\@...............//.com> wrote in message
> news:9fge2r...@mid.individual.net...
>> Peter Crosland wrote:
>>>> I need to trim the overhang off some corrugated asbestos sheets
>>>> which form the roof of my garage. I could do it with my 9" angle
>>>> grinder, but it would
>>>> no doubt generate a lot of asbestos dust, which I understand is
>>>> hazardous. Can anyone give me any advice on how I should do it?
>>>
>>>
>>> Under no circumstances should you attempt to do this yourself. You
>>> need to get the job done by a specialist company who are authorised
>>> to do the work. Attempting to do it yourself would put yourself, your
>>> family and other people in danger.
>>>
>>>
>>> Peter Crosland
>>
>> Peter,
>>
>> That advice is simply not practical (nor extremely dangerous) for the
>> small jobs that the DiYers are usually involved in when using the old
>> asbetos cement sheets which usually contain far less than 15% of least
>> harmful chrysotile asbestos fibres.
>
>
> Unless you have personal knowledge of the sheets the OP has then you cannot
> be sure.
reinforced cement sheets - so you can be fairly certain.
> It is obvious that the OP has no comprehension of the danger he
> might cause, or be in. The bottom line is you just cannot afford to take
> changes with asbestos. It would be grossly irresponsible for the OP to
> proceed with without qualified professional advice.
--
Cheers,
John.
/=================================================================\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\=================================================================/
John Rumm
I am not sure how you inferred that cash was suggesting all specialist
contractors are clueless - it seems to be he was only saying that some
are. The difficulty however for one procuring services of said
contractor is having enough background knowledge to identify one type
from the other. That *is* an area where groups such as this probably can
help.
> an angle grinder or the like would not be wise. In any case the OP would be
> very unwise to proceed solely on the basis of advice given on a NG.
> Furthermore chrysotile may be the least dangerous of the various asbestos
> types but nevertheless it is the most common cause of pleural mesothelioma
> so to call it safe is simply untrue.
This is a rather meaningless statement in isolation... it may be that
exposure to chrysotile asbestos is by far the most common exposure event.
Also, no one is suggesting it is "safe" to work with, only that it is a
lower risk than working with other types, and that being in an
environment containing said fibres for a short time, while wearing
adequate PPE is not going to significantly raise the risks of
contracting a disease as a direct result.
Peter Parry
<g6...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>"Peter Parry" <pe...@wpp.ltd.uk> wrote in message
>Do you have any evidence that the majority of licensed asbestos contractors
>are rogues
No, that is why I said "many" rather than "most". Many are rogues.
>or is this just an opinion of yours?
An opinion based upon having to deal with them over the years,
including one (which still has a licence) who drove a tipper truck
full of asbestos cement sheet a mile down the road and dumped it in a
lay bye.
>Saying that few will give objective advice sounds like bigotry to me.
You need a new dictionary I think. In my experience I've never come
across one which gave objective, sound advice. They employ salesmen
to push the most expensive solution, not the most appropriate. If you
care to carry out even a rudimentary search you will find many others
with the same experience. The most common deceit is to say that
removing asbestos cement sheets requires a licensed contractor and
specialist equipment. A company I worked with moved into new premises
and found an outhouse with about 100 used asbestos cement sheets
stored in it. A leading licensed contractor was asked to give advice
and told them it would cost �12,000 to remove and they would be
committing an offence if they didn't use a licensed asbestos handling
company.
After doing a proper risk assessment and conversations with the HSE
the material was bagged on site and removed by a non-licensed but
perfectly competent contractor for �600 (most of which was the LA
waste disposal fee).
> As for the risks of exposure to asbestos there is no safe level.
That isn't strictly true except in H&SAW cases. Because a legal
precedent has been set which says any single exposure _may_ cause
asbestos related injury you can't defend a case except by proving you
never exposed a claimant to any asbestos no matter for how short a
time. That is very difficult to do.
A few years ago a company I knew had a claim brought against them by
someone who worked for them in 1970. As far as the company was
concerned they had never processed or used asbestos containing
products but the claimant said one day he had been told to cut an
asbestos sheet. No one who worked for the company at that date was
traceable. The claimant sister had also died of mesothelioma. She
and her brother used to play as children in blue asbestos loose fill
stored by their father, who owned a company making insulation
products, in a shed where they lived. That company had closed many
years ago.
As the company involved could produce no evidence to counter the
claimants assertion that he had handled asbestos they were held to be
liable despite it being many times more likely the claimants childhood
exposure was to blame for his illness. The company had no record of
who their insurer had been in 1970 so a perfectly healthy company
employing half a dozen staff had to be put into administration and
closed as they could not pay the award and costs. As it happened,
after the lawyers and receiver had taken first bite out of the carcass
the claimant received a few hundred pounds of the many thousands
awarded.
That is the real risk of asbestos and why employers are so afraid of
it.
>Of course the risk is increased by long term regular exposure but that does not mean that a single exposure can be
>considered safe.
Seeing as everyone, including you, breathes asbestos fibres every day
it does mean the single event risk is minimal as is the low dose risk.
All the evidence is that asbestos follows a normal dose/time
relationship with risk increasing with increasing dose and increasing
length of exposure. The vast majority of people with asbestos related
illness have been exposed to a lot for a long time. There are
exceptions, but there are few of them.
Grimly Curmudgeon
<.............\\@...............//.com> wrote:
>
>That information will put into perspective the health risks of toadies
>generation of asbestos - minimal in 30 to 60 years time.
Poop!Poop!
Cash
Yep, I think that should have read "todays generation due to asbestos use -
in 30 to 60 years time".
Ah well, brain and hands don't quite co-ordinate on occasions these days
Grimly, especially since the old brain blew a few circuits some time ago -
and its more obvious when I get a little agitated. LOL
You should some of the real Poop!Poops! I have written on official letters
since the last stroke - even given the odd po-faced official the odd laugh
or two when we have come face-to-face. All bloody good stuff...it also has
my wife and kids in bloody great bouts of laughter.
Cash
Peter Crosland
When people start shouting and using abuse, like you have, it is a sure sign
that they have lost their argument and can't bear to admit that they might
have got it wrong have got it wrong. I did not raise the subject of rogue
asbestos contractors. What I did say, and continue to say, is that it is
quite illogical to make glib claims that because they know of one or two
cowboys that all asbestos contractors are. You have presented no credible
evidence that a significant percentage of asbestos contractors are dishonest
or incompetent. Of course there are rogues in all walks of life. Given your
comments it is axiomatic that you have a jaundiced view of asbestos
contractors that has coloured your thinking and prevents you from discussing
the matter in a rational and civilised manner. As for what others have said
I shall not comment further.
Peter Crosland
The Natural Philosopher
like you are about to do next..
Clive George
> When people start shouting and using abuse, like you have, it is a sure sign
> that they have lost their argument and can't bear to admit that they might
> have got it wrong have got it wrong.
As a disinterested observer, it seems to me that Cash is winning any
argument in this thread right now. Your "sure sign" isn't nearly so sure
as you think it is.
> As for what others have said I shall not comment further.
Probably wise - always sensible to stop digging.
Peter Parry
<g6...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>What I did say, and continue to say, is that it is
>quite illogical to make glib claims that because they know of one or two
>cowboys that all asbestos contractors are.
Could you tell us how many ARCA members you have worked with in the
last decade and on what type of jobs?
Cash
Peter,
You got it wrong, you started the argument - and it was you who brought up
the rogue tradesmen theme - after I had merely commented on just one
experience (which was factual) with nary a mention of "rogue trader".
As for saying I lost the argument, you lost it when you went off onto silly
tangents over what after all was a very small, simple DiY job (on which you
really could not give a practical answer for) and only required some advice
as to the procedures - which you turned into something rather more
complicated than necessary.
As for my rant, it's seldom I do that, but you really are an irritating
person on times, especially when you persist in commenting on something you
only have a little knowledge off (or googled) - but ego won't allow you to
see that..
Good to see that we parted as enemies - and I can now carry on with the rest
of my life in the knowledge that I really pissed you off (terrible language
that! ROTFL
Cash
Cash
> On 11/10/2011 21:29, Peter Crosland wrote:
>
>> When people start shouting and using abuse, like you have, it is a
>> sure sign that they have lost their argument and can't bear to admit
>> that they might have got it wrong have got it wrong.
>
> As a disinterested observer, it seems to me that Cash is winning any
> argument in this thread right now. Your "sure sign" isn't nearly so
> sure as you think it is.
Thank you kindly for that young Clive. :-)
ARWadsworth
>>
>> Are you trying to give dennis a heart attack?
>
> Might keep him quiet for a week or two! LOL
A "zombie dennis" would be fun when he re-awakes as the living dead.
But would anyone notice any difference?
--
Adam