Worsening/non-existent public services?

[Ben]

Anyone else feeling that public services in general are becoming worse? To the point of basically being non-existent?

Helplines are automated and just refer you to the website or have no relevant option, emails are not replied to, it is impossible to speak to a human operator, etc.

For example my son is studying at a university abroad and he needs to get some documents legalised. British Council's phone number does not work and emails are not responded to. British Embassy's phone has an automated reply service with no relevant option; I understand he tried almost every option to speak to someone. The visas advice option is chargeable and the only other option he didn't try is for emergency consular assistance.

On my end I have been trying to get my local Council to sort out some refuse collection issues and it has also been nigh impossible to speak to a human on the phone.

I am most tempted to make a pun about trash but will refrain.

[Martin Brown]

On 14/06/2022 07:11, Ben wrote:
> Anyone else feeling that public services in general are becoming worse? To the point of basically being non-existent?
>
> Helplines are automated and just refer you to the website or have no relevant option, emails are not replied to, it is impossible to speak to a human operator,

How exactly is that any different to private for profit companies?

Like Northern Powergrid during the big storm Arwen outage when customer
information was hopeless and phone system and website failed dismally.

Or the various MFUs by airlines and airports during the recent half term
holidays.

Humans need to be paid whereas automated chatbots work for nothing.
Too bad if you can't fit your question into one of their options.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Brian]

A tip for the local council.

Faced with a similar problem - the website simply didn’t have the option
for the problem etc- I Emailed the CEO of the local council.

Within 30 mins I was contacted by someone from his office. Shortly after by
someone from the relevant department.

Just after mid-day, Council Work arrives, collects dead cat ( not ours) and
assures my wife it will be checked for a ‘chip’ and the owner informed if
possible.

Generally, I find an Email to the CEO works. Don’t ‘work up the chain’. Go
straight there. Invariably (almost) whoever is holding things up will be
told to get their finger out.

[Roland Perry]

In message <t89h42$13in$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, at 09:33:04 on Tue, 14 Jun
2022, Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> remarked:

I forget which utility company it was, but last month I experienced the
merry-go-round where you go to the online FAQ and eventually it takes
you to a page that says "call this number"...

...and that has numerous menus which eventually end up with "we can't be
bothered to actually talk to you, but the answer you want is definitely
at the link we are now sending to your smartphone".

Click the link and you are straight back at the FAQ page which says
"phone this (same as before) number".

I then found another number, which was more of an "if all else fails,
call this", and while it was answered promptly, as soon as I explained
what I wanted, they put the phone down.
--
Roland Perry

[JNugent]

On 14/06/2022 07:11 am, Ben wrote:

> Anyone else feeling that public services in general are becoming worse? To the point of basically being non-existent?

In the cases of the Passport Office(s), DVLA and other such government
departments, yes.

It's high time that "working from home" was brought back under control.

> Helplines are automated and just refer you to the website or have no relevant option, emails are not replied to, it is impossible to speak to a human operator, etc.

That's because there aren't enough people actually at work, irrespective
of the numbers allegedly in post.

[JNugent]

On 14/06/2022 09:33 am, Martin Brown wrote:

> On 14/06/2022 07:11, Ben wrote:

>> Anyone else feeling that public services in general are becoming
>> worse? To the point of basically being non-existent?
>>
>> Helplines are automated and just refer you to the website or have no
>> relevant option, emails are not replied to, it is impossible to speak
>> to a human operator,
>
> How exactly is that any different to private for profit companies?
>
> Like Northern Powergrid during the big storm Arwen outage when customer
> information was hopeless and phone system and website failed dismally.

Information is always hard to come by when there's a power cut.

>
> Or the various MFUs by airlines and airports during the recent half term
> holidays.
>
> Humans need to be paid whereas automated chatbots work for nothing.

And even though many people are supposed to actually *be* "working from
home".

[Jon Ribbens]

On 2022-06-14, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> On 14/06/2022 07:11 am, Ben wrote:
>> Anyone else feeling that public services in general are becoming
>> worse? To the point of basically being non-existent?
>
> In the cases of the Passport Office(s), DVLA and other such government
> departments, yes.
>
> It's high time that "working from home" was brought back under control.
>
>> Helplines are automated and just refer you to the website or have no
>> relevant option, emails are not replied to, it is impossible to speak
>> to a human operator, etc.
>
> That's because there aren't enough people actually at work, irrespective
> of the numbers allegedly in post.

I would hope you have some evidence you can share with us to back up
this claim?

[Les. Hayward]

On 14/06/2022 11:04, JNugent wrote:
> On 14/06/2022 07:11 am, Ben wrote:
>
>> Anyone else feeling that public services in general are becoming
>> worse? To the point of basically being non-existent?
>
> In the cases of the Passport Office(s), DVLA and other such government
> departments, yes.
>
> It's high time that "working from home" was brought back under control.
>

I'd agree with that in quite a few instances, but I was impressed when I
needed to enquire if a licence was required for me to purchase some
explosives precursors.

I had made a typo on the online form and a civil servant (working from
home during the covid peak) was kind enough to telephone me to sort it
out. I was even more pleased to learn that no licence was required at
all, since I was working within the remit of a genuine company and had a
valid reason for the purchases. If every issue was handled as well, I
would certainly support home working.

[JNugent]

Have you not been following the news over the last few weeks?

Even the civil service unions don't claim that there are enough people
at work and providing services from there.

They just claim (in terms) that it's their members' right to be allowed
to stay at home and "work from" [heh!] there.

There was an unbelievable but delicious article in The Guardian wherein
an anonymous central London civil servant (living in Eastbourne) claimed
that he shouldn't have to go back to work because he didn't want to
incur the £3,000+ cost of a season ticket (despite his undoubted receipt
of £4,000+ in Inner London Weighting). You really couldn't make up this
sort of stuff.

But getting back to the point of the complaint, it's still a shame that
this working "from home" doesn't seem to provide the required (and quite
normal, until the spring of 2020) level of service, isn't it?

In the case of passports, for instance, anyone in urgent need ought to
be able to take the same approach they always used to be able to adopt:
travel to Peterborough, Westminster (Petty France), Liverpool or
wherever and deal directly with staff over the counter. I remember doing
exactly that for my first passport, over fifty years ago, and even for a
short-notice renewal some years ago.

[Colin Bignell]

On 14/06/2022 11:06, JNugent wrote:
> On 14/06/2022 09:33 am, Martin Brown wrote:
>
>> On 14/06/2022 07:11, Ben wrote:
>
>>> Anyone else feeling that public services in general are becoming
>>> worse? To the point of basically being non-existent?
>>>
>>> Helplines are automated and just refer you to the website or have no
>>> relevant option, emails are not replied to, it is impossible to speak
>>> to a human operator,
>>
>> How exactly is that any different to private for profit companies?
>>
>> Like Northern Powergrid during the big storm Arwen outage when
>> customer information was hopeless and phone system and website failed
>> dismally.
>
> Information is always hard to come by when there's a power cut.

Having once been part of a team running an information line during major
power cuts, I know that the engineers are usually too busy trying to fix
things to keep the people running the information line updated.

>>
>> Or the various MFUs by airlines and airports during the recent half
>> term holidays.
>>
>> Humans need to be paid whereas automated chatbots work for nothing.
>
> And even though many people are supposed to actually *be* "working from
> home".
>
>> Too bad if you can't fit your question into one of their options.
>
>

--
Colin Bignell

[Roland Perry]

In message <jgro2r...@mid.individual.net>, at 16:33:46 on Tue, 14
Jun 2022, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:

>In the case of passports, for instance, anyone in urgent need ought to
>be able to take the same approach they always used to be able to adopt:
>travel to Peterborough,

Someone I know did that last week.

>Westminster (Petty France),

iirc it's moved to near the country end of Victoria Station.

>Liverpool or wherever and deal directly with staff over the counter.

--
Roland Perry

[JNugent]

On 14/06/2022 04:38 pm, Roland Perry wrote:

> JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:
>
>> In the case of passports, for instance, anyone in urgent need ought to
>> be able to take the same approach they always used to be able to
>> adopt: travel to Peterborough,
>
> Someone I know did that last week.

Good. Are they now allowing citizens into the building?

>
>> Westminster (Petty France),
>
> iirc it's moved to near the country end of Victoria Station.

Long time since I've been around the area.

>> Liverpool or wherever and deal directly with staff over the counter.

India Building, Water Street, L2.

It's probably been moved to Aberdeen or something.

[Roland Perry]

In message <jgrp07...@mid.individual.net>, at 16:49:26 on Tue, 14

Jun 2022, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:

>On 14/06/2022 04:38 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
>
>> JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:
>>
>>> In the case of passports, for instance, anyone in urgent need ought
>>>to be able to take the same approach they always used to be able to
>>>adopt: travel to Peterborough,
>> Someone I know did that last week.
>
>Good. Are they now allowing citizens into the building?

They had an appointment, I presume it wasn't done on the pavement
outside.

>>> Westminster (Petty France),
>> iirc it's moved to near the country end of Victoria Station.
>
>Long time since I've been around the area.

I think the move out of Petty France was what caused the Windrush
records to be shredded (rather than transferred to alternative storage).

>>> Liverpool or wherever and deal directly with staff over the counter.
>
>India Building, Water Street, L2.
>
>It's probably been moved to Aberdeen or something.

--
Roland Perry

[Nasti Chestikov]

www.scrive.com

Trying to use their live chat returns the most amusing "to ensure we can serve you better, our live chat is currently disabled".

As someone else pointed out, this working from home nonsense needs to be reined in.

[JNugent]

On 14/06/2022 04:43 pm, Colin Bignell wrote:

> On 14/06/2022 11:06, JNugent wrote:
>> On 14/06/2022 09:33 am, Martin Brown wrote:
>>> On 14/06/2022 07:11, Ben wrote:
>
>>>> Anyone else feeling that public services in general are becoming
>>>> worse? To the point of basically being non-existent?
>
>>>> Helplines are automated and just refer you to the website or have no
>>>> relevant option, emails are not replied to, it is impossible to
>>>> speak to a human operator,
>
>>> How exactly is that any different to private for profit companies?
>>>
>>> Like Northern Powergrid during the big storm Arwen outage when
>>> customer information was hopeless and phone system and website failed
>>> dismally.
>
>> Information is always hard to come by when there's a power cut.
>
> Having once been part of a team running an information line during major
> power cuts, I know that the engineers are usually too busy trying to fix
> things to keep the people running the information line updated.

It's a shame, because it is probably the sort of occasion where
consumers are most in need of updates. I remember a three-day power cut
- and in winter at that. Luckily, we were able to heat the living room
because it had a gas fire attached to one wall. But there was no central
heating, no hot water and no hob for cooking. It was like camping,
except without the Camping Gaz stove. No means of entertainment or
recreation unless it involved a torch.

Coming home from work on the second day, I was all for taking some
holiday and going and visiting relatives in a part of the country where
I had never ever had to endure a power cut except those caused by strikes.

We had a lot of power cuts. Eventually I and others complained to the
district council and our MP. The suppliers subsequently upgraded the
local equipment and "outages" are nowadays almost as rare as they are in
other places.

[JNugent]

On 14/06/2022 04:57 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <jgrp07...@mid.individual.net>, at 16:49:26 on Tue, 14
> Jun 2022, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:
>> On 14/06/2022 04:38 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
>>
>>> JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:
>>>
>>>> In the case of passports, for instance, anyone in urgent need ought
>>>> to  be able to take the same approach they always used to be able to
>>>> adopt: travel to Peterborough,
>>>  Someone I know did that last week.
>>
>> Good. Are they now allowing citizens into the building?
>
> They had an appointment, I presume it wasn't done on the pavement outside.

Well, that's the point.

Traditionally, that has not been necessary.

[Jon Ribbens]

On 2022-06-14, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> On 14/06/2022 12:14 pm, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>> On 2022-06-14, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>> On 14/06/2022 07:11 am, Ben wrote:
>>>> Anyone else feeling that public services in general are becoming
>>>> worse? To the point of basically being non-existent?
>>
>>> In the cases of the Passport Office(s), DVLA and other such government
>>> departments, yes.
>>
>>> It's high time that "working from home" was brought back under control.
>>
>>>> Helplines are automated and just refer you to the website or have no
>>>> relevant option, emails are not replied to, it is impossible to speak
>>>> to a human operator, etc.
>>
>>> That's because there aren't enough people actually at work, irrespective
>>> of the numbers allegedly in post.
>>
>> I would hope you have some evidence you can share with us to back up
>> this claim?
>
> Have you not been following the news over the last few weeks?

Is that a "no" then?

[Roland Perry]

In message <jgrr10...@mid.individual.net>, at 17:23:59 on Tue, 14

Jun 2022, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:
>On 14/06/2022 04:57 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <jgrp07...@mid.individual.net>, at 16:49:26 on Tue, 14
>>Jun 2022, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:
>>> On 14/06/2022 04:38 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>
>>>> JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>> In the case of passports, for instance, anyone in urgent need
>>>>>ought to  be able to take the same approach they always used to be
>>>>>able to adopt: travel to Peterborough,

>>>>  Someone I know did that last week.
>>>
>>> Good. Are they now allowing citizens into the building?

>> They had an appointment, I presume it wasn't done on the pavement
>>outside.
>
>Well, that's the point.
>
>Traditionally, that has not been necessary.

I think it's been necessary to have an appointment for in-person
passport applications for a long time. Otherwise, apart from everything
else, they can't have a system for charging a fee for "urgent" ones.

--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <f319a5b9-a0a5-40f9...@googlegroups.com>, at
08:54:24 on Tue, 14 Jun 2022, Nasti Chestikov
<nasti.c...@gmail.com> remarked:

Most "live chats" are with bots, so it's a non-sequitur. Meanwhile, many
organisations believe that working from home improves efficiency and a
generation ago one of the pilot studies was BT Directory Enquiries. They
used people for whom it was impractical to commute (living on Scottish
islands for example).

In the last two years many offices have been closed (and even now
running only at half-occupancy because of Covid precautions) which is a
rather specific example of impracticality. Onto which you can tack
self-isolation where people who are doing it as a precaution can still
work remotely.

A helpline ought to be a classic case of a job very often just as easily
done from home, as in a room full of noisy colleagues. Done properly
you'd have a selection of those colleagues continuously on hand via
Zoom, anyway.
--
Roland Perry

[Martin Brown]

On 14/06/2022 16:43, Colin Bignell wrote:
> On 14/06/2022 11:06, JNugent wrote:
>> On 14/06/2022 09:33 am, Martin Brown wrote:
>>
>>> On 14/06/2022 07:11, Ben wrote:
>>
>>>> Anyone else feeling that public services in general are becoming
>>>> worse? To the point of basically being non-existent?
>>>>
>>>> Helplines are automated and just refer you to the website or have no
>>>> relevant option, emails are not replied to, it is impossible to
>>>> speak to a human operator,
>>>
>>> How exactly is that any different to private for profit companies?
>>>
>>> Like Northern Powergrid during the big storm Arwen outage when
>>> customer information was hopeless and phone system and website failed
>>> dismally.
>>
>> Information is always hard to come by when there's a power cut.
>
> Having once been part of a team running an information line during major
> power cuts, I know that the engineers are usually too busy trying to fix
> things to keep the people running the information line updated.

They should still have enough time to tick a box to say this switchgear
or line has been checked and is OK or NBG. The problem in our area was
mainly caused by CBA to check a particularly difficult to reach breaker.

The engineers we had in our area were absolutely clueless about fault
finding. They were totally confused by the various farms and businesses
with their own generators because local mains supply is both unreliable
and insufficient (not 3 phase) for their needs.

Their online system said our village was on power so they treated each
house as a separate incident (most people didn't bother to report it
since the phone system completely overloaded and it required many goes).

They insisted on checking the house electrics and the drop line to it
before they would move on to checking the external mains feed. If they
didn't tick that box first (wasting about an hour at each premises) then
the customer would be charged a call out fee. There was no way to inform
the system that it wasn't just me that was off but the *entire* village.

Unluckily they went to a friends house first where there is no street
lighting so he couldn't persuade them that it was the main feed that was
down and *not* a fault on his premises. By the time they had finished at
his place it was after midnight and the street lamps would ordinarily be
off anyway. The engineers wasted a huge amount of time checking things
that were working *because* the main system information was *WRONG*.

Basic errors in communication like referring to "now" in their status
answer phone message (and having an insanely long preamble about how you
could do everything on their by then non-functional website). This stuff
is not rocket science and it showed they had absolutely no training or
skills in the area that they were supposed to be handling.

Much of the problems were caused by cutting back on preventative
maintenance with trees ready to fall on lines and poles that had rotted
through at the base such that one falling over had a domino effect.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[JNugent]

Obviously, the number of times in a single lifetime that one has
occasion to visit the Passport Office or a regional branch will be limited.

But I walked into the Liverpool office and walked out an hour later with
my first passport.

And some years later, did the same at the Peterborough office with
passport renewals and a first issue for one person.

There was no question of an appointment on either occasion. Peterborough
was a fag, though. At least I lived in Liverpool at the time of my first
passport being issued and only had to travel a mile or two.

My bet is that the only reason why appointments are currently necessary
(if that's the right word) at the moment is that a large proportion of
staff are "working at home".

We have all (even Mr Ribbens, though he's currently feigning ignorance
of the matter) heard and read the complaints about recent and current
slow-to-non-existent service from the Passport Office and from the DVLA.
The civil service unions' responses to those complaints seem to run
mainly along the lines that their members are entitled to their pay
(including, where relevant, London Weighting) without reference to the
little matter of whether they ever attend their workplace or do any of
the departments' work.

[JNugent]

On 15/06/2022 09:40 am, Roland Perry wrote:

> Nasti Chestikov <nasti.c...@gmail.com> remarked:

>> www.scrive.com
>
>> Trying to use their live chat returns the most amusing "to ensure we
>> can serve you better, our live chat is currently disabled".
>> As someone else pointed out, this working from home nonsense needs to
>> be reined in.
>
> Most "live chats" are with bots, so it's a non-sequitur.

If that were the case, there'd be little point in switching off that
"service".

[Jon Ribbens]

On 2022-06-15, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> On 15/06/2022 09:40 am, Roland Perry wrote:
>> I think it's been necessary to have an appointment for in-person
>> passport applications for a long time. Otherwise, apart from everything
>> else, they can't have a system for charging a fee for "urgent" ones.
>
> Obviously, the number of times in a single lifetime that one has
> occasion to visit the Passport Office or a regional branch will be limited.
>
> But I walked into the Liverpool office and walked out an hour later with
> my first passport.
>
> And some years later, did the same at the Peterborough office with
> passport renewals and a first issue for one person.
>
> There was no question of an appointment on either occasion. Peterborough
> was a fag, though. At least I lived in Liverpool at the time of my first
> passport being issued and only had to travel a mile or two.
>
> My bet is that the only reason why appointments are currently necessary
> (if that's the right word) at the moment is that a large proportion of
> staff are "working at home".

How would you explain the contradiction that Roland pointed out between
your theory and the fact that appointments were necessary for many years
before COVID, and hence before the prevalence of working from home?

Here's evidence that appointments were required for both standard and
urgent passport applications at least as far back as 2009:

http://web.archive.org/web/20090505165514/http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Passports/Applicationinformation/DG_174153
http://web.archive.org/web/20120817050014/http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Passports/howlongittakesandurgentappplications/DG_174149

> We have all (even Mr Ribbens, though he's currently feigning ignorance
> of the matter) heard and read the complaints about recent and current
> slow-to-non-existent service from the Passport Office and from the DVLA.

Please refrain from making false claims about other posters to the group.

[JNugent]

On 15/06/2022 03:29 pm, Jon Ribbens wrote:
> On 2022-06-15, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>> On 15/06/2022 09:40 am, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> I think it's been necessary to have an appointment for in-person
>>> passport applications for a long time. Otherwise, apart from everything
>>> else, they can't have a system for charging a fee for "urgent" ones.
>>
>> Obviously, the number of times in a single lifetime that one has
>> occasion to visit the Passport Office or a regional branch will be limited.
>>
>> But I walked into the Liverpool office and walked out an hour later with
>> my first passport.
>>
>> And some years later, did the same at the Peterborough office with
>> passport renewals and a first issue for one person.
>>
>> There was no question of an appointment on either occasion. Peterborough
>> was a fag, though. At least I lived in Liverpool at the time of my first
>> passport being issued and only had to travel a mile or two.
>>
>> My bet is that the only reason why appointments are currently necessary
>> (if that's the right word) at the moment is that a large proportion of
>> staff are "working at home".
>
> How would you explain the contradiction that Roland pointed out between
> your theory and the fact that appointments were necessary for many years
> before COVID, and hence before the prevalence of working from home?

Appointments may well have been desirable (and even preferred by the
staff at the Passport Office) but they were not necessary. I have never
had an appointment, but still always got my passport(s), same day.

> Here's evidence that appointments were required for both standard and
> urgent passport applications at least as far back as 2009:
>
> http://web.archive.org/web/20090505165514/http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Passports/Applicationinformation/DG_174153
> http://web.archive.org/web/20120817050014/http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Passports/howlongittakesandurgentappplications/DG_174149

"Error" "Parking not available" (or words to that effect).

>
>> We have all (even Mr Ribbens, though he's currently feigning ignorance
>> of the matter) heard and read the complaints about recent and current
>> slow-to-non-existent service from the Passport Office and from the DVLA.
>
> Please refrain from making false claims about other posters to the group.

There's no other way of putting this, but you did maintain that you had
not heard, read or encountered (whichever) media reports (and there've
been lots of them) of terrible and far from adequate service from the
Passport Office and DVLA (which are just examples). You even asked for
"evidence" of it (just as though I would start trawling the newspaper
websites to "prove" something which isn't in doubt).

You are not usually thought of as being as out of touch with the news as
that.

[Jon Ribbens]

On 2022-06-15, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> On 15/06/2022 03:29 pm, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>> How would you explain the contradiction that Roland pointed out between
>> your theory and the fact that appointments were necessary for many years
>> before COVID, and hence before the prevalence of working from home?
>
> Appointments may well have been desirable (and even preferred by the
> staff at the Passport Office) but they were not necessary. I have never
> had an appointment, but still always got my passport(s), same day.

How long ago was this?

>> Here's evidence that appointments were required for both standard and
>> urgent passport applications at least as far back as 2009:
>>
>> http://web.archive.org/web/20090505165514/http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Passports/Applicationinformation/DG_174153
>> http://web.archive.org/web/20120817050014/http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Passports/howlongittakesandurgentappplications/DG_174149
>
> "Error" "Parking not available" (or words to that effect).

For some reason the Wayback Machine has a bug whereby it redirects you
to another URL after the page has loaded. If you press Escape once the
contents are visible then it looks it won't do so.

The pages say things like:

Passport interviews are a new part of the application process if you
are applying for a first adult passport. This means your application
will take longer than in the past – you should allow six weeks.
Interviews are held at offices around the country and each one takes
around 30 minutes.

...

You will then get a letter asking you to phone IPS to make an
appointment for an interview at one of the 68 interview offices. You
can choose any office, but you may not always be able to get the
exact time or date you want.

>>> We have all (even Mr Ribbens, though he's currently feigning ignorance
>>> of the matter) heard and read the complaints about recent and current
>>> slow-to-non-existent service from the Passport Office and from the DVLA.
>>
>> Please refrain from making false claims about other posters to the group.
>
> There's no other way of putting this, but you did maintain that you had
> not heard, read or encountered (whichever) media reports (and there've
> been lots of them) of terrible and far from adequate service from the
> Passport Office and DVLA (which are just examples). You even asked for
> "evidence" of it (just as though I would start trawling the newspaper
> websites to "prove" something which isn't in doubt).

If that were true then you would be able to indicate where I said that.

[JNugent]

On 15/06/2022 04:21 pm, Jon Ribbens wrote:
> On 2022-06-15, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>> On 15/06/2022 03:29 pm, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>>> How would you explain the contradiction that Roland pointed out between
>>> your theory and the fact that appointments were necessary for many years
>>> before COVID, and hence before the prevalence of working from home?
>>
>> Appointments may well have been desirable (and even preferred by the
>> staff at the Passport Office) but they were not necessary. I have never
>> had an appointment, but still always got my passport(s), same day.
>
> How long ago was this?
>
>>> Here's evidence that appointments were required for both standard and
>>> urgent passport applications at least as far back as 2009:
>>>
>>> http://web.archive.org/web/20090505165514/http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Passports/Applicationinformation/DG_174153
>>> http://web.archive.org/web/20120817050014/http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Passports/howlongittakesandurgentappplications/DG_174149
>
>> "Error" "Parking not available" (or words to that effect).
>
> For some reason the Wayback Machine has a bug whereby it redirects you
> to another URL after the page has loaded. If you press Escape once the
> contents are visible then it looks it won't do so.
>
> The pages say things like:
>
> Passport interviews are a new part of the application process if you
> are applying for a first adult passport. This means your application
> will take longer than in the past – you should allow six weeks.
> Interviews are held at offices around the country and each one takes
> around 30 minutes.

It may say that. Citizens are still entitled to attend in person,
without an interview, at the relevant office.

And it's no problem. I got my first passport by non-appointed attendance
in person (more than 50 years ago).

> ...
>
> You will then get a letter asking you to phone IPS to make an
> appointment for an interview at one of the 68 interview offices. You
> can choose any office, but you may not always be able to get the
> exact time or date you want.

I have never been to an "interview office". I have only ever been to
Liverpool or Peterborough.

>
>>>> We have all (even Mr Ribbens, though he's currently feigning ignorance
>>>> of the matter) heard and read the complaints about recent and current
>>>> slow-to-non-existent service from the Passport Office and from the DVLA.
>
>>> Please refrain from making false claims about other posters to the group.
>
>> There's no other way of putting this, but you did maintain that you had
>> not heard, read or encountered (whichever) media reports (and there've
>> been lots of them) of terrible and far from adequate service from the
>> Passport Office and DVLA (which are just examples). You even asked for
>> "evidence" of it (just as though I would start trawling the newspaper
>> websites to "prove" something which isn't in doubt).
>
> If that were true then you would be able to indicate where I said that.

Well... please feel free to take this opportunity to make your position
clear.

Do you accept that currently, service from the Passport Office and DVLA
is up to the required standard (or even up the the normal standard)?

Yes / No [delete as appropriate]

[Jon Ribbens]

On 2022-06-15, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> On 15/06/2022 04:21 pm, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>> On 2022-06-15, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>> On 15/06/2022 03:29 pm, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>>>> How would you explain the contradiction that Roland pointed out between
>>>> your theory and the fact that appointments were necessary for many years
>>>> before COVID, and hence before the prevalence of working from home?
>>>
>>> Appointments may well have been desirable (and even preferred by the
>>> staff at the Passport Office) but they were not necessary. I have never
>>> had an appointment, but still always got my passport(s), same day.
>>
>> How long ago was this?

You forgot to answer this bit.

> It may say that. Citizens are still entitled to attend in person,
> without an interview, at the relevant office.

I assume you mean "without an appointment"?
Do you have any evidence for this?

> And it's no problem. I got my first passport by non-appointed attendance
> in person (more than 50 years ago).

I think we can all agree that procedures relating to passports may have
changed a little in five decades.

> Well... please feel free to take this opportunity to make your position
> clear.
>
> Do you accept that currently, service from the Passport Office and DVLA
> is up to the required standard (or even up the the normal standard)?
>
> Yes / No [delete as appropriate]

Your addiction to the false dichotomy fallacy is really very tedious.
It's not the genius argumentative trick you seem to think it is, it's
just dull.

I have no idea if their service standards are up to their pre-COVID
levels (which I think is what you mean), but I am perfectly prepared,
for the sake of argument, to take your word for it that they are not.

(I will have a single data point in the near future, in that I have
a passport application pending...)

[Colin Bignell]

On 15/06/2022 09:02, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 14/06/2022 16:43, Colin Bignell wrote:
>> On 14/06/2022 11:06, JNugent wrote:
>>> On 14/06/2022 09:33 am, Martin Brown wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 14/06/2022 07:11, Ben wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Anyone else feeling that public services in general are becoming
>>>>> worse? To the point of basically being non-existent?
>>>>>
>>>>> Helplines are automated and just refer you to the website or have
>>>>> no relevant option, emails are not replied to, it is impossible to
>>>>> speak to a human operator,
>>>>
>>>> How exactly is that any different to private for profit companies?
>>>>
>>>> Like Northern Powergrid during the big storm Arwen outage when
>>>> customer information was hopeless and phone system and website
>>>> failed dismally.
>>>
>>> Information is always hard to come by when there's a power cut.
>>
>> Having once been part of a team running an information line during
>> major power cuts, I know that the engineers are usually too busy
>> trying to fix things to keep the people running the information line
>> updated.
>
> They should still have enough time to tick a box to say this switchgear
> or line has been checked and is OK or NBG. The problem in our area was
> mainly caused by CBA to check a particularly difficult to reach breaker.

At the time, the only way to communicate with most of them was by the
radios fitted to their vehicles. No boxes to tick, but, in rural areas,
possibly a long trek back to the vehicle to make a report. People were
also less used to expecting instant information.

That, unfortunately, is privatisation for you. When I did it, I worked
for a nationalised industry. It may not have been entirely efficient,
but the investment in infrastructure was there, with 20, 40 and 60 year
plans for improving it. We also had to keep to under 2% pa profit, so
prices were never artificially inflated. Indeed, I remember tariffs
being reduced one year, so as not to exceed the 2% ceiling.

--
Colin Bignell

[Roland Perry]

In message <jgu5ka...@mid.individual.net>, at 14:37:14 on Wed, 15 Jun
2022, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:

>>>>>>> In the case of passports, for instance, anyone in urgent need
>>>>>>>ought  to  be able to take the same approach they always used to
>>>>>>>be able to  adopt: travel to Peterborough,
>>
>>>>>>  Someone I know did that last week.
>>>>>
>>>>> Good. Are they now allowing citizens into the building?
>>
>>>>  They had an appointment, I presume it wasn't done on the pavement
>>>>outside.
>>>
>>> Well, that's the point.
>>>
>>> Traditionally, that has not been necessary.

>> I think it's been necessary to have an appointment for in-person
>>passport applications for a long time. Otherwise, apart from
>>everything else, they can't have a system for charging a fee for
>>"urgent" ones.
>
>Obviously, the number of times in a single lifetime that one has
>occasion to visit the Passport Office or a regional branch will be
>limited.

One of the advantages of the improvement in communications over the
years is that it isn't necessary to rely entirely upon one's own
personal experiences. It's possible to hear about other people's
experiences first hand, or read reports in the media.
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <jguckj...@mid.individual.net>, at 16:36:51 on Wed, 15

Jun 2022, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:

>I got my first passport by non-appointed attendance in person (more
>than 50 years ago).

The past is a different country, they do things differently there.
--
Roland Perry

[billy bookcase]

"Ben" <benada...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5cf1cc0f-901a-469f...@googlegroups.com...

> Anyone else feeling that public services in general are becoming worse?
> To the point of basically being non-existent?

Ignoring for a moment the possibility that any money raised is usually
wasted on inflated salaries, self aggrandising publicity and needless
bureaucratic empire building , the fact is that public services are
starved of money simply because people (however defined) aren't
paying enough tax.

At local level Central Govt has been steadily and stealthily withdrawing
support from Local Govt while a main election plank of all competing
parties is in not raising the level of Council Tax.

This again ignores the possibility that many existing taxpayers simply
couldn't afford to pay higher rates of tax.

So that while there may be nostalgia for "the good old days" reflected
in the popularity of

KEEP CALM
AND
CARRY ON

there would probably be less enthusiasm for

KEEP CALM
AND
CARRY ON
PAYING
WAR TIME
RATES OF
INCOME TAX


Whilst in the private sector...

I'd imagine that at least some readers of this group can remember a time
when almost everything you bought and used - from the clothes you wore
to the TV's you watched to the cups you drank your tea out of were all
made in the UK. And when to pay a utility bill you went to a showroom
on the high street.

Apparently the UK now has the highest number of people in employment ever.

Can someone please explain where all these people are working ?
And what jobs are they doing ?


bb

[Roland Perry]

In message <jgu5mn...@mid.individual.net>, at 14:38:31 on Wed, 15 Jun
2022, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:

>On 15/06/2022 09:40 am, Roland Perry wrote:
>
>> Nasti Chestikov <nasti.c...@gmail.com> remarked:
>
>>> www.scrive.com
>>
>>> Trying to use their live chat returns the most amusing "to ensure we
>>>can serve you better, our live chat is currently disabled".
>>> As someone else pointed out, this working from home nonsense needs
>>>to be reined in.
>> Most "live chats" are with bots, so it's a non-sequitur.
>
>If that were the case, there'd be little point in switching off that
>"service".

I agree, but they seem to do it anyway, perhaps because eventually there
might be an escalation route to a real person.
--
Roland Perry

[JNugent]

On 15/06/2022 05:34 pm, Jon Ribbens wrote:
> On 2022-06-15, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>> On 15/06/2022 04:21 pm, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>>> On 2022-06-15, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>>> On 15/06/2022 03:29 pm, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>>>>> How would you explain the contradiction that Roland pointed out between
>>>>> your theory and the fact that appointments were necessary for many years
>>>>> before COVID, and hence before the prevalence of working from home?
>>>>
>>>> Appointments may well have been desirable (and even preferred by the
>>>> staff at the Passport Office) but they were not necessary. I have never
>>>> had an appointment, but still always got my passport(s), same day.
>>>
>>> How long ago was this?
>
> You forgot to answer this bit.
>
>> It may say that. Citizens are still entitled to attend in person,
>> without an interview, at the relevant office.
>
> I assume you mean "without an appointment"?
> Do you have any evidence for this?

Do you have any evidence that callers are not allowed at government
offices with reception desks, waiting rooms and interview cubicles??

>> And it's no problem. I got my first passport by non-appointed attendance
>> in person (more than 50 years ago).
>
> I think we can all agree that procedures relating to passports may have
> changed a little in five decades.

Have they?

By legislation for the benefit of citizens or simply procedurally for
the convenience of staff?

>> Well... please feel free to take this opportunity to make your position
>> clear.
>
>> Do you accept that currently, service from the Passport Office and DVLA
>> is up to the required standard (or even up the the normal standard)?
>
>> Yes / No [delete as appropriate]
>
> Your addiction to the false dichotomy fallacy is really very tedious.
> It's not the genius argumentative trick you seem to think it is, it's
> just dull.

That's fair enough.

You creditably don't want to tell a lie but can't bring yourself to
answer "No".

> I have no idea if their service standards are up to their pre-COVID
> levels (which I think is what you mean), but I am perfectly prepared,
> for the sake of argument, to take your word for it that they are not.

There would be no need for you to do that. It's been in all the papers
and other media for some time.

> (I will have a single data point in the near future, in that I have
> a passport application pending...)

Best of luck with it.

Renewal, I take it?

The last time I needed one, I used the Post Office procedure and paid
the extra. Anything's better than having to brave the M25, M11 and A1(M).

[JNugent]

Oh, indeed!

Some people, though, apparently don't read, watch or listen to the media.

[JNugent]

On 16/06/2022 09:27 am, billy bookcase wrote:

> "Ben" <benada...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> Anyone else feeling that public services in general are becoming worse?
>> To the point of basically being non-existent?
>
> Ignoring for a moment the possibility that any money raised is usually
> wasted on inflated salaries, self aggrandising publicity and needless
> bureaucratic empire building , the fact is that public services are
> starved of money simply because people (however defined) aren't
> paying enough tax.
>
> At local level Central Govt has been steadily and stealthily withdrawing
> support from Local Govt while a main election plank of all competing
> parties is in not raising the level of Council Tax.
>
> This again ignores the possibility that many existing taxpayers simply
> couldn't afford to pay higher rates of tax.

People say that and it's easy to see why, but as a teenager, I paid
income tax at nearly twice the Standard Rate of today, and with a much
smaller tax-free allowance (in real and cash terms).

Seven-and-six in the pound, IIRC.

I don't recall very much public or media outrage about it at the time.
Indeed, such outrage as did exist was more likely to be aimed at those
who suggested reducing the rate.

>
> So that while there may be nostalgia for "the good old days" reflected
> in the popularity of
>
> KEEP CALM
> AND
> CARRY ON
>
> there would probably be less enthusiasm for
>
> KEEP CALM
> AND
> CARRY ON
> PAYING
> WAR TIME
> RATES OF
> INCOME TAX
>
> Whilst in the private sector...
>
> I'd imagine that at least some readers of this group can remember a time
> when almost everything you bought and used - from the clothes you wore
> to the TV's you watched to the cups you drank your tea out of were all
> made in the UK. And when to pay a utility bill you went to a showroom
> on the high street.
>

Fondly remembered. Plus the beautiful red-brick non-showroom offices at
the nearest power-generating site.

>
> Apparently the UK now has the highest number of people in employment ever.
>
> Can someone please explain where all these people are working ?
> And what jobs are they doing ?

Not all of them (obviously), but as to the "where", a good many are
apparently working at home.

That's not necessarily bad in itself - I used to do a lot of (genuinely
considerative) work at home. But that was only possible in one
particular sort of role for that employer, a role which also involved
considerable travel. I can't easily imagine what most of my former
colleagues would be doing at home.

[Jon Ribbens]

On 2022-06-16, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> On 15/06/2022 05:34 pm, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>> On 2022-06-15, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>> On 15/06/2022 04:21 pm, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>>>> On 2022-06-15, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>>>> Appointments may well have been desirable (and even preferred by the
>>>>> staff at the Passport Office) but they were not necessary. I have never
>>>>> had an appointment, but still always got my passport(s), same day.
>>>>
>>>> How long ago was this?
>>
>> You forgot to answer this bit.

You still forgot to answer this.

>>> It may say that. Citizens are still entitled to attend in person,
>>> without an interview, at the relevant office.
>>
>> I assume you mean "without an appointment"?
>> Do you have any evidence for this?
>
> Do you have any evidence that callers are not allowed at government
> offices with reception desks, waiting rooms and interview cubicles??

Yes, the links I already posted (plus the current sites) which say
that you need an appointment.

>>> And it's no problem. I got my first passport by non-appointed attendance
>>> in person (more than 50 years ago).
>>
>> I think we can all agree that procedures relating to passports may have
>> changed a little in five decades.
>
> Have they?

Er, yes?

> By legislation for the benefit of citizens or simply procedurally for
> the convenience of staff?

By both legislation and changes to internal procedures, I should think.
I don't understand the point of your question - are you trying to claim
that things *haven't* changed in five decades?

>>> Do you accept that currently, service from the Passport Office and DVLA
>>> is up to the required standard (or even up the the normal standard)?
>>
>>> Yes / No [delete as appropriate]
>>
>> Your addiction to the false dichotomy fallacy is really very tedious.
>> It's not the genius argumentative trick you seem to think it is, it's
>> just dull.
>
> That's fair enough.
>
> You creditably don't want to tell a lie but can't bring yourself to
> answer "No".

Er, no. That's why it's a fallacy.

>> I have no idea if their service standards are up to their pre-COVID
>> levels (which I think is what you mean), but I am perfectly prepared,
>> for the sake of argument, to take your word for it that they are not.
>
> There would be no need for you to do that. It's been in all the papers
> and other media for some time.

You're so insistent on argument that you won't even accept me taking
your word for something!?

>> (I will have a single data point in the near future, in that I have
>> a passport application pending...)
>
> Best of luck with it.
>
> Renewal, I take it?
>
> The last time I needed one, I used the Post Office procedure and paid
> the extra. Anything's better than having to brave the M25, M11 and A1(M).

It's a first passport for a child. I don't think it requires going
anywhere, it's all on-line. They say "10 weeks" but whether they
manage that remains to be seen.

[Roland Perry]

In message <jh0gtu...@mid.individual.net>, at 12:02:23 on Thu, 16

Does that include yourself?

[But the point here is I spend most of the day doing so].
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <slrntanamu.5...@raven.unequivocal.eu>, at 22:12:46
on Thu, 16 Jun 2022, Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> remarked:

>>> I think we can all agree that procedures relating to passports may have
>>> changed a little in five decades.
>>
>> Have they?
>
>Er, yes?
>
>> By legislation for the benefit of citizens or simply procedurally for
>> the convenience of staff?
>
>By both legislation and changes to internal procedures, I should think.
>I don't understand the point of your question - are you trying to claim
>that things *haven't* changed in five decades?

It's not just the processes involved (my first passport was obtained for
me by the travel agent, so I could take my first overseas flight a
couple of weeks later - such processes still exist for obtaining various
tedious-to-queue-for foreign visas).

But now that passports are much much more than just a travel document,
being used as a defacto residence permit, ID card, anti-fraud token etc,
the amount of work involved in verifying applications has increased
enormously.

Again, my children first travelled abroad simply by having their name
written on a particular page at the back; nowadays they have to get
their own passports.
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <t8epho$maa$1...@dont-email.me>, at 09:27:37 on Thu, 16 Jun
2022, billy bookcase <bi...@anon.com> remarked:

>I'd imagine that at least some readers of this group can remember a time
>when almost everything you bought and used - from the clothes you wore
>to the TV's you watched to the cups you drank your tea out of were all
>made in the UK. And when to pay a utility bill you went to a showroom
>on the high street.
>
>Apparently the UK now has the highest number of people in employment ever.
>
>Can someone please explain where all these people are working ?
>And what jobs are they doing ?

A lot of them are doing jobs that didn't exist back then, like writing
games software, serving coffee at Starbucks, managing people's private
pension schemes, and driving Hermes delivery vans (full of packages
picked and packed at ecommerce warehouses which didn't exist back then).
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <jh0hj1...@mid.individual.net>, at 12:13:38 on Thu, 16
Jun 2022, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:

>> Apparently the UK now has the highest number of people in employment
>>ever.
>> Can someone please explain where all these people are working ?
>> And what jobs are they doing ?
>
>Not all of them (obviously), but as to the "where", a good many are
>apparently working at home.
>
>That's not necessarily bad in itself - I used to do a lot of (genuinely
>considerative) work at home. But that was only possible in one
>particular sort of role for that employer, a role which also involved
>considerable travel. I can't easily imagine what most of my former
>colleagues would be doing at home.

You can't bolt together cars from home, but we aren't building many cars
in UK factories any more. But people working from home can do the CAD
design work on the car's components, and write software for the robots
which do most of the heavy lifting, and manage the just-in-time [yes, I
know] supply chains. It's that kind of change of paradigm driving the
workplace nowadays.

Talking of cars I have a friend who works for one of the larger
companies installing electric-charger points in people's homes. And
rather than deploy his expertise one house at a time, he works from
home receiving calls from installation [and field repair] engineers
who have found a tricky-one to do.

That's not because the company lets him work from home, or Covid forced
them to, but their business model saves on office rental by always only
employing work-from home for roles like that. His previous job was very
similar, providing support for customers of a B2B software platform in
the construction industry.

A distant relative has done much the same for perhaps 30yrs now, tech
support for customers of Dell grappling with installing and running
UNIX, rather than Windows.
--
Roland Perry

[JNugent]

On 16/06/2022 11:12 pm, Jon Ribbens wrote:

> On 2022-06-16, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>> On 15/06/2022 05:34 pm, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>>> On 2022-06-15, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>>> On 15/06/2022 04:21 pm, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>>>>> On 2022-06-15, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>>>>> Appointments may well have been desirable (and even preferred by the
>>>>>> staff at the Passport Office) but they were not necessary. I have never
>>>>>> had an appointment, but still always got my passport(s), same day.
>
>>>>> How long ago was this?
>
>>> You forgot to answer this bit.
>
> You still forgot to answer this.
>
>>>> It may say that. Citizens are still entitled to attend in person,
>>>> without an interview, at the relevant office.
>
>>> I assume you mean "without an appointment"?
>>> Do you have any evidence for this?
>>
> Do you have any evidence that callers are not allowed at government
>> offices with reception desks, waiting rooms and interview cubicles??
>
> Yes, the links I already posted (plus the current sites) which say
> that you need an appointment.

On what compulsion or sanction for just turning up?

>>>> And it's no problem. I got my first passport by non-appointed attendance
>>>> in person (more than 50 years ago).
>
>>> I think we can all agree that procedures relating to passports may have
>>> changed a little in five decades.

It is a lot less than five decades since I last turned up at
Peterborough for an on-the-spot renewal.

And I've done that twice, come to think of it.

>> Have they?
>
> Er, yes?
>
>> By legislation for the benefit of citizens or simply procedurally for
>> the convenience of staff?
>
> By both legislation and changes to internal procedures, I should think.
> I don't understand the point of your question - are you trying to claim
> that things *haven't* changed in five decades?

What legislative provision prevents callers from er... ... calling at
the passport Office?

>
>>>> Do you accept that currently, service from the Passport Office and DVLA
>>>> is up to the required standard (or even up the the normal standard)?
>
>>>> Yes / No [delete as appropriate]
>
>>> Your addiction to the false dichotomy fallacy is really very tedious.
>>> It's not the genius argumentative trick you seem to think it is, it's
>>> just dull.
>
>> That's fair enough.
>> You creditably don't want to tell a lie but can't bring yourself to
>> answer "No".
>
> Er, no. That's why it's a fallacy.

So which is it?

"Yes", or "no"?

>>> I have no idea if their service standards are up to their pre-COVID
>>> levels (which I think is what you mean), but I am perfectly prepared,
>>> for the sake of argument, to take your word for it that they are not.

You have no idea.

I see.

>> There would be no need for you to do that. It's been in all the papers
>> and other media for some time.
>
> You're so insistent on argument that you won't even accept me taking
> your word for something!?
>

You have just said (in two almost consecutive sentences) that you have
no idea whether the current standard of service in important government
departments is up to standard and that you have encountered that very
fact in the media.

Perhaps that can be reconciled by reference to a belief that every
complainant is lying or exaggerating.

>>> (I will have a single data point in the near future, in that I have
>>> a passport application pending...)
>
>> Best of luck with it.
>> Renewal, I take it?
>> The last time I needed one, I used the Post Office procedure and paid
>> the extra. Anything's better than having to brave the M25, M11 and A1(M).
>
> It's a first passport for a child. I don't think it requires going
> anywhere, it's all on-line. They say "10 weeks" but whether they
> manage that remains to be seen.

Still... best of luck.

[Jon Ribbens]

On 2022-06-17, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> On 16/06/2022 11:12 pm, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>> On 2022-06-16, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>> On 15/06/2022 05:34 pm, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>>>> On 2022-06-15, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>>>> On 15/06/2022 04:21 pm, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>>>>>> On 2022-06-15, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>>>>>> Appointments may well have been desirable (and even preferred by the
>>>>>>> staff at the Passport Office) but they were not necessary. I
>>>>>>> have never had an appointment, but still always got my
>>>>>>> passport(s), same day.
>>
>>>>>> How long ago was this?
>>
>>>> You forgot to answer this bit.
>>
>> You still forgot to answer this.

Since you're refusing to answer this, the unavoidable conclusion is
that you don't want to admit it was a long time ago, and hence of
no relevance to your claim.

>> Do you have any evidence that callers are not allowed at government
>>> offices with reception desks, waiting rooms and interview cubicles??
>>
>> Yes, the links I already posted (plus the current sites) which say
>> that you need an appointment.
>
> On what compulsion or sanction for just turning up?

"Compulsion or sanction"? What on earth are you talking about?
Generally if you turn up without an appointment to something
that requires an appointment, you don't get imprisoned or shot
dead on the spot, they just don't agree to see you and don't do
whatever it was you wanted.

>>> There would be no need for you to do that. It's been in all the papers
>>> and other media for some time.
>>
>> You're so insistent on argument that you won't even accept me taking
>> your word for something!?
>>
> You have just said (in two almost consecutive sentences) that you have
> no idea whether the current standard of service in important government
> departments is up to standard and that you have encountered that very
> fact in the media.

No I haven't. If you spent more time reading the posts you're replying
to, perhaps you'd have fewer problems understanding them.

[Roland Perry]

In message <slrntapouo.5...@raven.unequivocal.eu>, at 20:28:08
on Fri, 17 Jun 2022, Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> remarked:

>>> Do you have any evidence that callers are not allowed at government

>>>> offices with reception desks, waiting rooms and interview cubicles??
>>>
>>> Yes, the links I already posted (plus the current sites) which say
>>> that you need an appointment.
>>
>> On what compulsion or sanction for just turning up?
>
>"Compulsion or sanction"? What on earth are you talking about?
>Generally if you turn up without an appointment to something
>that requires an appointment, you don't get imprisoned or shot
>dead on the spot, they just don't agree to see you and don't do
>whatever it was you wanted.

Exactly. The people I know with a recent appointment at the Peterborough
Office originally turned up late (because the date was changed and they
didn't notice the time was also changed) and so they had to travel back
home empty-handed. The trip last week was a second attempt. I don't know
if the 8.30am time they were given was a silent punishment for missing
the previous one, or just the only availability remaining.

My District Council is back to doing general purpose (Council tax,
Housing benefits etc) walk-ins [through Covid you always needed an
appointment], but discussion with a Planning Officer requires an
appointment (which the say they try to arrange within 5 days of
receiving notification of the details that will be on the table).
--
Roland Perry

[JNugent]

On 17/06/2022 11:53 am, Roland Perry wrote:

> JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:
>
>>> Apparently the UK now has the highest number of people in employment
>>> ever.
>>> Can someone please explain where all these people are working ?
>>> And what jobs are they doing ?
>
>> Not all of them (obviously), but as to the "where", a good many are
>> apparently working at home.
>> That's not necessarily bad in itself - I used to do a lot of
>> (genuinely considerative) work at home. But that was only possible in
>> one particular sort of role for that employer, a role which also
>> involved considerable travel. I can't easily imagine what most of my
>> former colleagues would be doing at home.
>
> You can't bolt together cars from home, but we aren't building many cars
> in UK factories any more.

So "working from home" is not some sort of inalienable human right.

> But people working from home can do the CAD
> design work on the car's components, and write software for the robots
> which do most of the heavy lifting, and manage the just-in-time [yes, I
> know] supply chains. It's that kind of change of paradigm driving the
> workplace nowadays.

Do they never have to confer with colleagues, even on an informal,
several times a day, basis?

I certainly used to do that all the time.

> Talking of cars I have a friend who works for one of the larger
> companies installing electric-charger points in people's homes. And
> rather than deploy his expertise one house at a time, he works from
> home receiving calls from installation [and field repair] engineers
> who have found a tricky-one to do.

That model is similar to self-employment and is already known to work.
Such a job does not require daily attendance at a particular base.

>
> That's not because the company lets him work from home, or Covid forced
> them to, but their business model saves on office rental by always only
> employing work-from home for roles like that. His previous job was very
> similar, providing support for customers of a B2B software platform in
> the construction industry.

Win.

>
> A distant relative has done much the same for perhaps 30yrs now, tech
> support for customers of Dell grappling with installing and running
> UNIX, rather than Windows.

Those are good examples, but the work wasn't like that and isn't for
most people.

[JNugent]

On 17/06/2022 09:28 pm, Jon Ribbens wrote:
> On 2022-06-17, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>> On 16/06/2022 11:12 pm, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>>> On 2022-06-16, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>>> On 15/06/2022 05:34 pm, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>>>>> On 2022-06-15, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>>>>> On 15/06/2022 04:21 pm, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2022-06-15, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Appointments may well have been desirable (and even preferred by the
>>>>>>>> staff at the Passport Office) but they were not necessary. I
>>>>>>>> have never had an appointment, but still always got my
>>>>>>>> passport(s), same day.
>>>
>>>>>>> How long ago was this?
>>>
>>>>> You forgot to answer this bit.
>>>
>>> You still forgot to answer this.
>
> Since you're refusing to answer this, the unavoidable conclusion is
> that you don't want to admit it was a long time ago, and hence of
> no relevance to your claim.

See below.

>
>>>> Do you have any evidence that callers are not allowed at government
>>>> offices with reception desks, waiting rooms and interview cubicles??
>
>>> Yes, the links I already posted (plus the current sites) which say
>>> that you need an appointment.
>
>> On what compulsion or sanction for just turning up?
>
> "Compulsion or sanction"? What on earth are you talking about?
> Generally if you turn up without an appointment to something
> that requires an appointment, you don't get imprisoned or shot
> dead on the spot, they just don't agree to see you and don't do
> whatever it was you wanted.

Is that what happens?

If you say "Yes", please explain how you know.

>>>> There would be no need for you to do that. It's been in all the papers
>>>> and other media for some time.
>
>>> You're so insistent on argument that you won't even accept me taking
>>> your word for something!?
>
>> You have just said (in two almost consecutive sentences) that you have
>> no idea whether the current standard of service in important government
>> departments is up to standard and that you have encountered that very
>> fact in the media.
>
> No I haven't. If you spent more time reading the posts you're replying
> to, perhaps you'd have fewer problems understanding them.

Perhaps it'd be easier if you didn't keep snipping the bit others refer to.

[Roland Perry]

In message <jh6266...@mid.individual.net>, at 14:27:34 on Sat, 18

Jun 2022, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:

>>>>> Do you have any evidence that callers are not allowed at
>>>>>government offices with reception desks, waiting rooms and
>>>>>interview cubicles??
>>
>>>> Yes, the links I already posted (plus the current sites) which say
>>>> that you need an appointment.
>>
>>> On what compulsion or sanction for just turning up?

>> "Compulsion or sanction"? What on earth are you talking about?
>> Generally if you turn up without an appointment to something
>> that requires an appointment, you don't get imprisoned or shot
>> dead on the spot, they just don't agree to see you and don't do
>> whatever it was you wanted.
>
>Is that what happens?
>
>If you say "Yes", please explain how you know.

I hate to interrupt your flow, but I have posted a specific example
related to me last week, which isn't just a recent one, its a passport
office!
--
Roland Perry

[billy bookcase]

"Roland Perry" <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote in message news:b0bjrwER...@perry.uk...

Whilst its true that some of those jobs didn't exist at all ( software
including games) or in such profusion - coffee shops, delivery driving
or pensions to claim they've not only replaced but exceed the number of
jobs previously available. requires rather more convincing examples
IMO.

Just to take your pension example, as being part of the "finance industry"
including banking etc. In the "old days" before the advent of computers
every financial transaction (including paying utility bills etc)
involving a member of the public, had to be processed by a human being
at, at least two or more stages. Once the info reached HQ, calculations were
often made by comptometer operators usually ladies often sat at machines in
rows of desks in big rooms each with in and an out trays being
constantly replenished and emptied usually by a man with a trolley. (I'm
a big fan of the "Look at Life" films 7 series available on Amazon)
And that just at HQ; to say nothing of staff required at each bank branch
Most of those jobs have gone. Joe public has to feed the computers
himself.

Hermes deliveries are part of ecommerce which is successful in cutting
prices precisely because it requires much less labour input. (Plus
containerisation making importing from low wage areas easier) Jobs lost
in retail and in wholesale - both customer facing, clerical and in intermediate
warehousing and distribution points far exceed the number of delivery
drivers - many of whom are self employed in any case.

This hasn't even touched on the fact that years ago 99% of the items
being delivered by Hermes would have been made in British factories
by gainfully employed British workers. And possibly delivered in British
made vans. Now its all made by gainfully employed Chinese workers instead.


If people weren't serving coffee in Starbucks etc, years ago many of them
might well have been serving beer instead in one of the numerous pubs which
have all shut down.

And so I can only repeat my question. If more people are in employment
nowadays than ever before, then where are they all working ?


bb

[Roland Perry]

In message <jh622r...@mid.individual.net>, at 14:25:47 on Sat, 18

Jun 2022, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:

>On 17/06/2022 11:53 am, Roland Perry wrote:
>
>> JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:
>>
>>>> Apparently the UK now has the highest number of people in
>>>>employment ever.
>>>> Can someone please explain where all these people are working ?
>>>> And what jobs are they doing ?
>>
>>> Not all of them (obviously), but as to the "where", a good many are
>>>apparently working at home.
>>> That's not necessarily bad in itself - I used to do a lot of
>>>(genuinely considerative) work at home. But that was only possible in
>>>one particular sort of role for that employer, a role which also
>>>involved considerable travel. I can't easily imagine what most of my
>>>former colleagues would be doing at home.

>> You can't bolt together cars from home, but we aren't building many
>>cars in UK factories any more.
>
>So "working from home" is not some sort of inalienable human right.

I don't know where you've suddenly plucked that extreme categorisation
from! Of course, during Covid some people had a statutory requirement to
work from home, and others who couldn't saw their industries stagnate.

But now that the bounce-back is reasonably stable, it turns out that
quite a few organisations have decided it's just as satisfactory to have
many (or even most) people working from home as the office.

One bunch of people I know would previously have been processing various
paperwork and emails in small rooms in an office where they'd rarely
bump into any colleagues all day long. That's assuming one of the
"working from the office" benefits is contact wit random colleagues in
other departments (round the water-cooler or otherwise).

They are still working a rota of alternate days in the office and at
home, which means they can pick up and send post, and sit at a desk
staring at MS Office all day. They also use Zoom a lot, in fact there's
more direct communication amongst the team, and their service users,
now, than there ever used to be.

>> But people working from home can do the CAD design work on the car's
>>components, and write software for the robots which do most of the
>>heavy lifting, and manage the just-in-time [yes, I know] supply
>>chains. It's that kind of change of paradigm driving the workplace
>>nowadays.
>
>Do they never have to confer with colleagues, even on an informal,
>several times a day, basis?
>
>I certainly used to do that all the time.

See above. It just depends what the job is. As a manager at one place I
always used to drift around and interrupt^H^H have a chat with members
of the team maybe half the hours I was in the office rather than in the
field (so perhaps two days a week). Everything seemed to go like
clockwork. But if I was preparing a Powerpoint presentation for a
conference, or fettling the annual budget numbers to put in front of a
board meeting, I'd rather be on my own. And that could be literally
anywhere in the world.

>> Talking of cars I have a friend who works for one of the larger
>>companies installing electric-charger points in people's homes. And
>>rather than deploy his expertise one house at a time, he works from
>> home receiving calls from installation [and field repair] engineers
>> who have found a tricky-one to do.
>
>That model is similar to self-employment and is already known to work.
>Such a job does not require daily attendance at a particular base.

It used to. All those support engineers would have had to commute to an
office, and do their task in what might quite a crowded and noisy room
alongside their colleagues.

>> That's not because the company lets him work from home, or Covid
>>forced them to, but their business model saves on office rental by
>>always only employing work-from home for roles like that. His
>>previous job was very similar, providing support for customers of a
>>B2B software platform in the construction industry.
>
>Win.
>> A distant relative has done much the same for perhaps 30yrs now,
>>tech support for customers of Dell grappling with installing and
>>running UNIX, rather than Windows.
>
>Those are good examples, but the work wasn't like that and isn't for
>most people.

Ah, but nowadays it is; for an increasing number of people as our
economy turns its back on manufacturing and embraces services.
--
Roland Perry

[JNugent]

Pubs have shut down because of significant changes in UK alcohol
consumption.

When I was a boy, my parents were publicans (for a period, anyway). We
lived in flats above the various pubs they managed. These were
street-corner pubs in older working-class areas. Of the four pubs I
remember living in (over), only two still exist and only one is still in
business. The others became redundant and were eventually demolished
because they lost their clientele, who were mainly people from the
immediate locality. Very little alcohol was consumed in such areas
except in pubs. Having beer or spirits at home was... unusual. Wine was
virtually unknown except maybe for a half-consumed bottle of sherry left
over from the Christmas before last.

People I remember in the trade were scathing about drinking at home
(which they astutely perceived as a threat to livelihood). Their term
for it was "Fender ale". That one's easy to interpret.

The other burgeoning trend was peripheral council estates with just one
pub for at least a mile in any direction. Pub-going was increasingly
something requiring transport. The 1967 introduction of the breathalyser
started a slippery slope for those and for the inter-war suburban
hostelries of the middle-class housing areas.

Today, who would go to a pub just for a drink (especially at the
prevailing prices)? Not I for one. There's no need for it. There are a
few bottles of wine out and plenty of beer (alcoholic and non-alcoholic)
on hand, as well as the usual selection of spirits and mixers. The venue
has to be attracting me with a bit more than that, whether food,
entertainment or the opportunity to meet in a convivial atmosphere with
friends. All of those are available to some extent, but not just at the
drop of a hat.

At the same time as all of that (or rather, at the end of all that),
city-centres are now bursting with sci-fi looking watering-holes
catering for a cocktail-swigging clientele which really didn't exist
when I were a lad.

Serious drinking for a lot of people now involves the supermarket.

[Jon Ribbens]

On 2022-06-19, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> People I remember in the trade were scathing about drinking at home
> (which they astutely perceived as a threat to livelihood). Their term
> for it was "Fender ale". That one's easy to interpret.

It really isn't. What does it mean, and why? Urban Dictionary hasn't
heard of it, and Google mainly comes up with results about a man called
Fender who owns a brewery.

> The other burgeoning trend was peripheral council estates with just one
> pub for at least a mile in any direction. Pub-going was increasingly
> something requiring transport. The 1967 introduction of the breathalyser
> started a slippery slope for those and for the inter-war suburban
> hostelries of the middle-class housing areas.

I do sometimes wonder how it works in rural areas, especially in large
countries such as the USA or Australia. You cannot drive to drinking
places, but you cannot get to drinking places without driving...
(leaving aside the apocryphal "drunk in charge of a horse" stories)

[JNugent]

Is the door closed and locked?

[Bill Taylor]

On Sun, 19 Jun 2022 16:21:04 -0000 (UTC), Jon Ribbens
<jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> wrote:

>On 2022-06-19, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>> People I remember in the trade were scathing about drinking at home
>> (which they astutely perceived as a threat to livelihood). Their term
>> for it was "Fender ale". That one's easy to interpret.
>
>It really isn't. What does it mean, and why? Urban Dictionary hasn't
>heard of it, and Google mainly comes up with results about a man called
>Fender who owns a brewery.

I'd guess it dates from the time when most people had coal fires. The
fender was a metal trim in front of the fire, so you'ld be drinking
your beer with your feet on the fender.

(I'm old enough to remember both coal fires and fenders.)

https://www.gratefireplaceaccessories.co.uk/br/accessories/fireplace-fenders

[Jon Ribbens]

Thanks. It's always interesting how things that people often regard is
timeless and eternal actually change quite quickly (e.g. 'fender'
referring to something you find in a home, and the idea that drinking
at home is strange and suspect).

[JNugent]

On 19/06/2022 06:23 am, Roland Perry wrote:

> JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:
>> Roland Perry wrote:
>>> JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:
>
>>>>> Apparently the UK now has the highest number of people in
>>>>> employment  ever.
>>>>> Can someone please explain where all these people are working ?
>>>>> And what jobs are they doing ?
>
>>>> Not all of them (obviously), but as to the "where", a good many are
>>>> apparently working at home.
>>>> That's not necessarily bad in itself - I used to do a lot of
>>>> (genuinely considerative) work at home. But that was only possible
>>>> in one particular sort of role for that employer, a role which also
>>>> involved considerable travel. I can't easily imagine what most of my
>>>> former colleagues would be doing at home.
>
>>>  You can't bolt together cars from home, but we aren't building many
>>> cars  in UK factories any more.
>
>> So "working from home" is not some sort of inalienable human right.
>
> I don't know where you've suddenly plucked that extreme categorisation
> from! Of course, during Covid some people had a statutory requirement to
> work from home, and others who couldn't saw their industries stagnate.

Just establishing first principles.

> But now that the bounce-back is reasonably stable, it turns out that
> quite a few organisations have decided it's just as satisfactory to have
> many (or even most) people working from home as the office.

That's their business. As long as they are private organisations, they
are free to do as they like with their own money.

It cannot apply, though, to the Passport Office or the DVLA (as mere
examples).

> One bunch of people I know would previously have been processing various
> paperwork and emails in small rooms in an office where they'd rarely
> bump into any colleagues all day long. That's assuming one of the
> "working from the office" benefits is contact wit random colleagues in
> other departments (round the water-cooler or otherwise).

> They are still working a rota of alternate days in the office and at
> home, which means they can pick up and send post, and sit at a desk
> staring at MS Office all day. They also use Zoom a lot, in fact there's
> more direct communication amongst the team, and their service users,
> now, than there ever used to be.

As long as that results in no loss to people not given a choice in the
matter (taxpayers, mainly), that's none of anyone else's business.

>>> But people working from home can do the CAD  design work on the car's
>>> components, and write software for the robots  which do most of the
>>> heavy lifting, and manage the just-in-time [yes, I  know] supply
>>> chains. It's that kind of change of paradigm driving the  workplace
>>> nowadays.
>
>> Do they never have to confer with colleagues, even on an informal,
>> several times a day, basis?
>> I certainly used to do that all the time.
>
> See above. It just depends what the job is. As a manager at one place I
> always used to drift around and interrupt^H^H have a chat with members
> of the team maybe half the hours I was in the office rather than in the
> field (so perhaps two days a week). Everything seemed to go like
> clockwork. But if I was preparing a Powerpoint presentation for a
> conference, or fettling the annual budget numbers to put in front of a
> board meeting, I'd rather be on my own. And that could be literally
> anywhere in the world.

See above.

The relevant test is the question of who is deriving a benefit and who
is experiencing a loss.

>>> Talking of cars I have a friend who works for one of the larger
>>> companies installing electric-charger points in people's homes. And
>>> rather than deploy his expertise one house at a time, he works from
>>> home receiving calls from installation [and field repair] engineers
>>> who have found a tricky-one to do.
>
>> That model is similar to self-employment and is already known to work.
>> Such a job does not require daily attendance at a particular base.
>
> It used to.

But not now. Lots of service engineers and similar operate from home. I
know an AA patrolman who brings his van home.

> All those support engineers would have had to commute to an
> office, and do their task in what might quite a crowded and noisy room
> alongside their colleagues.

You'd have a hard job convincing me that taxpayers or those needing
government services are losing out because of it. It's a bit of a red
herring, isn't it?

>>>  That's not because the company lets him work from home, or Covid
>>> forced  them to, but their business model saves on office rental by
>>> always only  employing work-from home for roles like that. His
>>> previous job was very  similar, providing support for customers of a
>>> B2B software platform in  the construction industry.
>
>> Win.

>>>  A distant relative has done much the same for perhaps 30yrs now,
>>> tech  support for customers of Dell grappling with installing and
>>> running  UNIX, rather than Windows.
>
>> Those are good examples, but the work wasn't like that and isn't for
>> most people.
>
> Ah, but nowadays it is; for an increasing number of people as our
> economy turns its back on manufacturing and embraces services.

We seem to have a disagreement on the meaning of "most".

[JNugent]

On 19/06/2022 05:21 pm, Jon Ribbens wrote:

> On 2022-06-19, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:

>> People I remember in the trade were scathing about drinking at home
>> (which they astutely perceived as a threat to livelihood). Their term
>> for it was "Fender ale". That one's easy to interpret.

> It really isn't. What does it mean, and why? Urban Dictionary hasn't
> heard of it, and Google mainly comes up with results about a man called
> Fender who owns a brewery.

OK. Sorry for being cryptic (not my intention).

A fender is (or at least, used to be) a piece of domestic hearth
furniture, usually rectangular in shape but open on one longer side,
placed around a fireplace, mainly to contain and deflect any burning
coals or embers which fall from the grate.

It was used as a synonym for "fireside" in reference to where the most
comfortable couple of chairs in a typical working-class household would
typically be located and in which consumers of alcohol at home were most
likely to be seated.

I suppose that it starting to be the case that the majority can't
remember fenders (as ubiquitous as they once were).

There are some illustrations here (SFW):

<https://www.etsy.com/uk/market/fireplace_fender>

>> The other burgeoning trend was peripheral council estates with just one
>> pub for at least a mile in any direction. Pub-going was increasingly
>> something requiring transport. The 1967 introduction of the breathalyser
>> started a slippery slope for those and for the inter-war suburban
>> hostelries of the middle-class housing areas.

> I do sometimes wonder how it works in rural areas, especially in large
> countries such as the USA or Australia. You cannot drive to drinking
> places, but you cannot get to drinking places without driving...
> (leaving aside the apocryphal "drunk in charge of a horse" stories)

The nearest pub here is about a half-mile away. I've been known to walk
it. My only experience of rural areas in England (never having lived in
a properly rural area) is that it sometimes pays to be friends with the
local beat officer. Or to get one of the party's drivers to either not
drink or drink only a limited amount.

I've never been to Australia, but in the USA, DUI is an absolute no-no.
Get caught and you'd never be allowed back in. Best avoided. Stop at
Walmart and get yourself a six-pack or two for the hotel room's fridge.

[Jon Ribbens]

On 2022-06-19, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> On 19/06/2022 05:21 pm, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>> On 2022-06-19, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>> People I remember in the trade were scathing about drinking at home
>>> (which they astutely perceived as a threat to livelihood). Their term
>>> for it was "Fender ale". That one's easy to interpret.
>
>> It really isn't. What does it mean, and why? Urban Dictionary hasn't
>> heard of it, and Google mainly comes up with results about a man called
>> Fender who owns a brewery.
>
> OK. Sorry for being cryptic (not my intention).
>
> A fender is (or at least, used to be) a piece of domestic hearth
> furniture, usually rectangular in shape but open on one longer side,
> placed around a fireplace, mainly to contain and deflect any burning
> coals or embers which fall from the grate.

Thanks, with that information it does indeed become easy to interpret.

>> I do sometimes wonder how it works in rural areas, especially in large
>> countries such as the USA or Australia. You cannot drive to drinking
>> places, but you cannot get to drinking places without driving...
>> (leaving aside the apocryphal "drunk in charge of a horse" stories)
>
> The nearest pub here is about a half-mile away. I've been known to walk
> it. My only experience of rural areas in England (never having lived in
> a properly rural area) is that it sometimes pays to be friends with the
> local beat officer. Or to get one of the party's drivers to either not
> drink or drink only a limited amount.

Indeed, but the "designated driver" concept only works if you're all
coming from the same location, or you're in the seemingly-unlikely
situation whereby you have someone who's prepared to drive many miles
to go around everyone's houses.

> I've never been to Australia, but in the USA, DUI is an absolute no-no.
> Get caught and you'd never be allowed back in. Best avoided. Stop at
> Walmart and get yourself a six-pack or two for the hotel room's fridge.

In American movies they often have out-of-the way roadhouses whereby
individuals drive there to meet people and drink beers, and they
invariably drive off afterwards - and not just characters who are
villains. Obviously it's not wise to assume that movies always
unfailingly depict reality, but I think that such establishments do
exist, and it's not obvious how they survive as businesses if reality
doesn't at least vaguely match the depictions.

[Roland Perry]

In message <jh930l...@mid.individual.net>, at 18:00:05 on Sun, 19

Jun 2022, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:

You must explain why not. The DVLA in particular has very few customers
turning up at the door (even fewer now they've closed all their regional
offices as an economy measure perhaps fifteen years ago). Similarly
most(sic) Passport Office [or whatever the relevant Agency is actually
called this week] workers are behind the scenes.

[Remainder snipped as we haven't yet established the first principles]

--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <jh8l7i...@mid.individual.net>, at 14:04:50 on Sun, 19

Jun 2022, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:
>On 19/06/2022 06:25 am, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <jh6266...@mid.individual.net>, at 14:27:34 on Sat, 18
>>Jun 2022, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:
>>
>>>>>>> Do you have any evidence that callers are not allowed at
>>>>>>>government  offices with reception desks, waiting rooms and
>>>>>>>interview cubicles??
>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, the links I already posted (plus the current sites) which say
>>>>>> that you need an appointment.
>>>>
>>>>> On what compulsion or sanction for just turning up?
>>
>>>>  "Compulsion or sanction"? What on earth are you talking about?
>>>> Generally if you turn up without an appointment to something
>>>> that requires an appointment, you don't get imprisoned or shot
>>>> dead on the spot, they just don't agree to see you and don't do
>>>> whatever it was you wanted.
>>>
>>> Is that what happens?
>>>
>>> If you say "Yes", please explain how you know.

>> I hate to interrupt your flow, but I have posted a specific example
>>related to me last week, which isn't just a recent one, its a passport
>>office!
>
>Is the door closed and locked?

here will be some kind of reception facility, and beyond that some kind
of 'locked door', yes. Not literally locked in some cases (not literally
bolted, or barred or chained).

I'm sure you've visited your GP or an outpatients clinic at some time in
your life. Did you just burst into the doctor's office, or first was
there an administrator checking you had an appointment. Did they need a
gun to shoo away people who had turned up the wrong day, or did those
patients just burst into the doctor's office anyway? The door to which
probably wasn't locked.
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <t8mk0b$f07$1...@dont-email.me>, at 08:42:02 on Sun, 19 Jun

2022, billy bookcase <bi...@anon.com> remarked:
>
>"Roland Perry" <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:b0bjrwER...@perry.uk...
>> In message <t8epho$maa$1...@dont-email.me>, at 09:27:37 on Thu, 16 Jun
>>2022, billy
>> bookcase <bi...@anon.com> remarked:
>>
>>>I'd imagine that at least some readers of this group can remember a time
>>>when almost everything you bought and used - from the clothes you wore
>>>to the TV's you watched to the cups you drank your tea out of were all
>>>made in the UK. And when to pay a utility bill you went to a showroom
>>>on the high street.
>>>
>>>Apparently the UK now has the highest number of people in employment ever.
>>>
>>>Can someone please explain where all these people are working ?
>>>And what jobs are they doing ?
>>
>> A lot of them are doing jobs that didn't exist back then, like
>>writing games software, serving coffee at Starbucks, managing
>>people's private pension schemes, and driving Hermes delivery vans
>>(full of packages picked and packed at ecommerce warehouses which
>>didn't exist back then).
>
>Whilst its true that some of those jobs didn't exist at all ( software
>including games) or in such profusion - coffee shops, delivery driving
>or pensions to claim they've not only replaced but exceed the number of
>jobs previously available. requires rather more convincing examples
>IMO.

You must seek advice from someone who compiles employment statistics and
breaks it down by occupation, and then compare the situation whenever
"back then" is, and now.

>Just to take your pension example, as being part of the "finance industry"
>including banking etc. In the "old days" before the advent of computers
>every financial transaction (including paying utility bills etc)
>involving a member of the public, had to be processed by a human being
>at, at least two or more stages.

However people probably had one bank account (or even none) one credit
card (or even none), one pension plan (or even none other than the state
pension) and so on.

...

>If people weren't serving coffee in Starbucks etc, years ago many of them
>might well have been serving beer instead in one of the numerous pubs which
>have all shut down.

There are a lot more Starbucks than there were pubs. (And at last two
other large chains exits, often next door to one another). Pubs often
had one couple running them, and one or two helpers on busy evenings.
Typical coffee shops (I was in one a fortnight ago) don't seem to be
able to manage with fewer than four or five staff all the time.

>And so I can only repeat my question. If more people are in employment
>nowadays than ever before, then where are they all working ?

In the new industries which have replaced the old.
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <slrntauj7g.5...@raven.unequivocal.eu>, at 16:21:04
on Sun, 19 Jun 2022, Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> remarked:

They invented the concept of "designated driver", which becomes
increasingly easy to find because many Millennials (etc) simply
don't drink.
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <jh8iev...@mid.individual.net>, at 13:17:35 on Sun, 19
Jun 2022, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:

...

>Serious drinking for a lot of people now involves the supermarket.

Which happen to have alcohol at about a third the price (for whatever
variety) because that's baked into the supermarket and pub business
models. Even if groups of people are out and about (leisure day-trip or
week of holiday) if they have transport - which many more do now - it's
far cheaper to have a self-catered picnic (pub food is marked up 3x on
materials as well, but there's the labour involved in preparing/cooking)
than at a pub, let alone at a gastro-pub.
--
Roland Perry

[JNugent]

So citizens can get in.

There's no law against it (it would be surprising if there were).

After that, it's a question of house-rules, not the law.

[JNugent]

That's of little importance. It's always been the case with DVLA (neé DVLC).

It was a matter of many complaints when the work was transferred from
county councils in the mid-1970s (incidentally cutting jobs at county
halls in places with even worse unemployment problems than Swansea - but
hey - at last, the state had a central file on all drivers, which was
the main aim).

> Similarly
> most(sic) Passport Office [or whatever the relevant Agency is actually
> called this week] workers are behind the scenes.
>
> [Remainder snipped as we haven't yet established the first principles]

The first principles include the fact that workers hired to work at a
workplace are not entitled to just not go in to work and instead "work"
at home.

Some jobs can be handled in that way. Most can't.

[Roland Perry]

In message <jhb1q4...@mid.individual.net>, at 11:51:48 on Mon, 20

Jun 2022, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:

>>>> But now that the bounce-back is reasonably stable, it turns out
>>>>that quite a few organisations have decided it's just as
>>>>satisfactory to have  many (or even most) people working from home
>>>>as the office.
>>>
>>> That's their business. As long as they are private organisations,
>>>they are free to do as they like with their own money.
>>>
>>> It cannot apply, though, to the Passport Office or the DVLA (as mere
>>>examples).

>> You must explain why not. The DVLA in particular has very few
>>customers turning up at the door (even fewer now they've closed all
>>their regional offices as an economy measure perhaps fifteen years ago).
>
>That's of little importance. It's always been the case with DVLA (neé DVLC).

It's important because despite being centralised, maybe even because of
being centralised, there are very few roles requiring face to face
contact with service users.

>It was a matter of many complaints when the work was transferred from
>county councils in the mid-1970s (incidentally cutting jobs at county
>halls in places with even worse unemployment problems than Swansea -
>but hey - at last, the state had a central file on all drivers, which
>was the main aim).
>
>> Similarly most(sic) Passport Office [or whatever the relevant Agency
>>is actually called this week] workers are behind the scenes.
>> [Remainder snipped as we haven't yet established the first
>>principles]
>
>The first principles include the fact that workers hired to work at a
>workplace are not entitled to just not go in to work and instead "work"
>at home.
>
>Some jobs can be handled in that way. Most can't.

Most of the work DVLA staff do, could be from home, if the employer put
suitable systems in place. Some organisations have done that simply as
part of a disaster recovery process, should the workplace become
uninhabitable for some reason.

Covid (and social distancing) for example is just one specific and
recent example of that.
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <jhb1ht...@mid.individual.net>, at 11:47:25 on Mon, 20

On the contrary, there are laws about trespass and assault (not to be
confused with battery) which would probably apply to uninvited persons
bursting into a GP's office.
--
Roland Perry

[billy bookcase]

"Roland Perry" <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote in message news:BMxlFeim...@perry.uk...

> In message <t8mk0b$f07$1...@dont-email.me>, at 08:42:02 on Sun, 19 Jun 2022, billy
> bookcase <bi...@anon.com> remarked:

<snip>

>
>>Just to take your pension example, as being part of the "finance industry"
>>including banking etc. In the "old days" before the advent of computers
>>every financial transaction (including paying utility bills etc)
>>involving a member of the public, had to be processed by a human being
>>at, at least two or more stages.
>
> However people probably had one bank account (or even none) one credit card (or even
> none), one pension plan (or even none other than the state pension) and so on.

In which case, with so many extra customers you might reasonably expect
banks to be opening up new branches everywhere and creating jobs.
Instead of which er....

<quote>

The NatWest Group, which comprises NatWest, Royal Bank of Scotland and
Ulster Bank, will have closed 1,154 branches by the end of 2022 - the
most of any banking group.

Lloyds Banking Group, made up of Lloyds Bank, Halifax and Bank of Scotland,
has shut down 770 sites, rising to 858 in 2022.

Barclays is the individual bank that has reduced its network the most,
with 867 branches having closed - or scheduled to - by the end of 2022.

https://www.which.co.uk/money/banking/switching-your-bank/bank-branch-closures-is-your-local-bank-closing-a28n44c8z0h5

<unquote>

...
>
>>If people weren't serving coffee in Starbucks etc, years ago many of them
>>might well have been serving beer instead in one of the numerous pubs which
>>have all shut down.
>
> There are a lot more Starbucks than there were pubs.

Er...

<quote>

There are 1,120 Starbucks locations in the United Kingdom as of June 15, 2022.

https://www.scrapehero.com/location-reports/Starbucks-UK/

Between 2008 and 2018, more than 11,000 pubs closed their doors, according
to the UK's Office for National Statistics

https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/ye-olde-fighting-cocks-scli-intl-gbr/index.html

<unquote>

One area where employment has certainly expanded is tertiary education what
with all the new universities opening up everywhere and not all of which
already existed as polytechnics. However all the expansion of tertiary
education has achieved is removing 16 and 17 years olds from the labour market
for three years while loaning them the money to pay for more educashun. So
that for every one new Professor of Swimming Pool Management or lecturer
in Swimming Pool Management (that will be £9000 P.A please) there will
possibly be 50 aspiring swimming pool managers who might otherwise
have been gainfully employed in actual jobs - if they actually existed.

This is another point. If there really are more people in employment
than ever before, this doesn't even take account of three years worth
of students who've been taken out of the labour market entirely who
previously would have had jobs..

>
> In the new industries which have replaced the old.

Such as ?


bb



> --
> Roland Perry

[JNugent]

On 21/06/2022 10:56 am, Roland Perry wrote:

> JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:
>> Roland Perry wrote:
>>>JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:

Has the Passport Office relocated all its caller facilities to GPs'
surgeries?

I didn't know that.

[JNugent]

You have to ask yourself why that hasn't been done.

[JNugent]

One other point is that in most, if not all, US states, the roadside
enforcement of DUI is less strict than it is here. The usual test is
something like walking a straight line, standing for a short time on one
leg or following the movement of an officer's finger with the eyes
without turning one's head.

It seems to me that the test is for identifiable impairment through
drunkenness rather than blood alcohol in excess of a specified small
proportion.

A bit, I suppose, like it was here before late 1967.

I still wouldn't take the chance.

[Jon Ribbens]

Indeed, that's depicted a lot in movies and TV shows too. I'm pretty
sure I could pass all of those tests while many times over the limit.
I'm not planning on putting it to the test though!

> It seems to me that the test is for identifiable impairment through
> drunkenness rather than blood alcohol in excess of a specified small
> proportion.
>
> A bit, I suppose, like it was here before late 1967.
>
> I still wouldn't take the chance.

Indeed, I'm certainly not recommending drunk-driving; I'm just always
curious about how things work.

[Roland Perry]

In message <slrntb4g46.23...@raven.unequivocal.eu>, at
22:04:54 on Tue, 21 Jun 2022, Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu>
remarked:

In the USA they are *far* more worried about teenage DUI than adult,
especially as you are supposed to be over-21 to drink (and hence the
much greater prevalence of routinely "carding" people in bars etc.
despite how old they look, even pensioners!)

Adults will tend to get the benefit of the doubt, and waved on their
way, unless they've actually been involved in a accident.
--
Roland Perry

[Mark Goodge]

One of the reasons that most countries switched to measuring blood alcohol
content rather than using roadside observational tests is that research showed
that many people who could easily pass a roadside observational test after
consuming alcohol were, nonetheless, still at a greatly increased risk of being
involved in an accident. That's because alcohol has a cocktail of different
effects on people, and the effects which make someone visibly drunk are not the
same ones as those which impair driving ability. In particular, the effects
which have the greatest effect on accident risk are impaired decision making and
impaired reaction time, and it's really difficult to measure either of those at
the roadside.

Plus, of course, roadside tests such as asking someone to stand on one leg or
walk in a straight line will penalise peple with health or mobility issues that
don't otherwise have any effect on their ability to drive safely. I fell over a
loose paving stone on my patio steps last week (don't laugh!) and seriously
sprained my ankle. For the last few days I doubt I'd have been able to stand on
one leg or walk without stumbling. But, precisely because my foot was stiff and
painful I've actually been driving more than usual as I've used the car for
shorter trips where I'd normally walk. It would add insult to injury were I to
be accused of DUI just because my feet weren't capable of propelling me in a
straight line or supporting my weight on one leg.

Mark

[billy bookcase]

"JNugent" <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote in message
news:jh8iev...@mid.individual.net...

>
> Pubs have shut down because of significant changes in UK alcohol consumption.
>
> When I was a boy, my parents were publicans (for a period, anyway).

That might explain a lot. Same as Margaret Thatcher's father being
grocer. Both dealing with the great unwashed to an extent which would
eventually detroy all illusions

> We lived in flats above the various pubs they managed. These were street-corner pubs
> in older working-class areas. Of the four pubs I remember living in (over), only two
> still exist and only one is still in business. The others became redundant and were
> eventually demolished because they lost their clientele, who were mainly people from
> the immediate locality. Very little alcohol was consumed in such areas except in pubs.
> Having beer or spirits at home was... unusual. Wine was virtually unknown except maybe
> for a half-consumed bottle of sherry left over from the Christmas before last.

And the only place you could buy alcoholic drink* was in an off-licence
attached to a local pub. However. I can very well remember as a very much
under-age child maybe 12 ish, in all innocence being able to buy large
flagons of cider with no difficulty at all,

*Apart from up-market grocers maybe who had a licence

>
> People I remember in the trade were scathing about drinking at home (which they
> astutely perceived as a threat to livelihood). Their term for it was "Fender ale". That
> one's easy to interpret.
>
> The other burgeoning trend was peripheral council estates with just one pub for at
> least a mile in any direction. Pub-going was increasingly something requiring
> transport.

"Flat Roof pubs" as exemplified by "The Jockey" in "Shameless"

> The 1967 introduction of the breathalyser started a slippery slope for those and for
> the inter-war suburban hostelries of the middle-class housing areas.


>
> Today, who would go to a pub just for a drink (especially at the prevailing prices)?
> Not I for one. There's no need for it. There are a few bottles of wine out and plenty
> of beer (alcoholic and non-alcoholic) on hand, as well as the usual selection of
> spirits and mixers. The venue has to be attracting me with a bit more than that,
> whether food, entertainment or the opportunity to meet in a convivial atmosphere with
> friends. All of those are available to some extent, but not just at the drop of a hat.
>
> At the same time as all of that (or rather, at the end of all that), city-centres are
> now bursting with sci-fi looking watering-holes catering for a cocktail-swigging
> clientele which really didn't exist when I were a lad.
>
> Serious drinking for a lot of people now involves the supermarket.

Indeed. But the point I was making was that pubs provided employment. They also served
as social centres - about the only place (apart from the betting shop maybe) where you
could meet up with total strangers and engage in casual conversation.

bb

[Simon Parker]

On 15/06/2022 15:29, Jon Ribbens wrote:
> On 2022-06-15, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>> On 15/06/2022 09:40 am, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> I think it's been necessary to have an appointment for in-person
>>> passport applications for a long time. Otherwise, apart from everything
>>> else, they can't have a system for charging a fee for "urgent" ones.
>>
>> Obviously, the number of times in a single lifetime that one has
>> occasion to visit the Passport Office or a regional branch will be limited.
>>
>> But I walked into the Liverpool office and walked out an hour later with
>> my first passport.
>>
>> And some years later, did the same at the Peterborough office with
>> passport renewals and a first issue for one person.
>>
>> There was no question of an appointment on either occasion. Peterborough
>> was a fag, though. At least I lived in Liverpool at the time of my first
>> passport being issued and only had to travel a mile or two.
>>
>> My bet is that the only reason why appointments are currently necessary
>> (if that's the right word) at the moment is that a large proportion of
>> staff are "working at home".
>
> How would you explain the contradiction that Roland pointed out between
> your theory and the fact that appointments were necessary for many years
> before COVID, and hence before the prevalence of working from home?
>
> Here's evidence that appointments were required for both standard and
> urgent passport applications at least as far back as 2009:
>
> http://web.archive.org/web/20090505165514/http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Passports/Applicationinformation/DG_174153
> http://web.archive.org/web/20120817050014/http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Passports/howlongittakesandurgentappplications/DG_174149

I can confirm that appointments were required for in-person passport
renewals in 2012 because I did it then.

The process involved making an appointment at the relevant passport
office, (Liverpool in my case as that's closest).

I then attended on the day of my appointment. There was no chance of
slipping in without an appointment as part of the process of gaining
access to the building involved going through court style security where
one needed to place metal objects (keys, mobile, etc.) in a tray and
then passing through a metal detector.

I needed to give my name to security who checked I had an appointment
prior to allowing me to complete that process.

Once I'd done that, I waited to be called to a window where I submitted
the application and supporting documentation. They had a quick look to
ensure there were no obvious errors or omissions and I was then told I
could either wait for several hours whilst my application was processed,
or leave my mobile number with them and they'd call me if there was a
problem / when the passport was ready.

A friend and former colleague had Chambers nearby so I went to see him
and we had lunch together whilst I was waiting.

Around three hours laters, I received a call on my mobile and went to
collect my completed passport.

Regards

S.P.

[Jon Ribbens]

On 2022-06-25, Simon Parker <simonpa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I then attended on the day of my appointment. There was no chance of
> slipping in without an appointment as part of the process of gaining
> access to the building involved going through court style security where
> one needed to place metal objects (keys, mobile, etc.) in a tray and
> then passing through a metal detector.

Hah. I remember doing that at the London Victoria office many years ago.
I had thought I was being very forward-thinking and well-prepared by
bringing scissors with me to cut out the passport photo after I got one
from a photo booth. It turned out the Passport Office security guards
did not agree that bringing scissors was sensible and helpful ;-)

[Roland Perry]

In message <jhdtok...@mid.individual.net>, at 14:01:08 on Tue, 21

Something they overlooked in their disaster recovery plan.
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <t8s7r2$6nr$1...@dont-email.me>, at 11:51:13 on Tue, 21 Jun

2022, billy bookcase <bi...@anon.com> remarked:
>
>"Roland Perry" <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:BMxlFeim...@perry.uk...
>> In message <t8mk0b$f07$1...@dont-email.me>, at 08:42:02 on Sun, 19 Jun
>>2022, billy
>> bookcase <bi...@anon.com> remarked:
>
><snip>
>
>>>Just to take your pension example, as being part of the "finance industry"
>>>including banking etc. In the "old days" before the advent of computers
>>>every financial transaction (including paying utility bills etc)
>>>involving a member of the public, had to be processed by a human being
>>>at, at least two or more stages.
>>
>> However people probably had one bank account (or even none) one
>>credit card (or even
>> none), one pension plan (or even none other than the state pension)
>>and so on.
>
>In which case, with so many extra customers you might reasonably expect
>banks to be opening up new branches everywhere and creating jobs.
>Instead of which er....

Because the jobs created are in back-offices, call centres etc, and
*not* on the High Street.

--
Roland Perry

[billy bookcase]

"Roland Perry" <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote in message news:ybNZAxge...@perry.uk...

I recently opened a new online Building Society Account. I did all this
online. The account is managed online. I set up the direct debits which
are paid automatically each month. Arranged payments into the account -
which again when once set up, are all automatic, and received a debit card
which I have to put into a slot myself. From what I can see, its not impossible
that all the introductory bumph, card reader, card, PIN that they send out
are all packed, and labelled automatically on the approprate dates. To then
come down a conveyor belt and fall into a sack. Which once full is then
conveyed to the loading bay to be collected by the postie,

While when phoning the call centre and having navigated the menus its
not uncommon to be kept waiting for twenty minutes.


bb

[Simon Parker]

Nowadays it would be hoped that a Disaster Recovery Plan is but a small
part of the overall Business Continuity Plan.

A current BCP should include details of what to do in the event of a
global pandemic these days, even if it didn't a few years ago.

But failure of the main telephone system, network infrastructure, etc.
should all be included within the wider BCP and those companies that had
planned for such outages were best placed when the pandemic struck.

Regards

S.P.

[Roland Perry]

In message <ji56b8...@mid.individual.net>, at 09:48:39 on Thu, 30
Jun 2022, Simon Parker <simonpa...@gmail.com> remarked:

Traditionally, such plans (whichever TLA you give them) would address
the issue of the main premises becoming uninhabitable [and hence
employees having to work from somewhere else, like home, while still
having access to the organisation's workflow materials].

In the case of Covid, it was many almost simultaneously, of course.

Some places I know imposed a 3-day quarantine on inbound snail mail,
then in almost hazmat redirected it (often by scanning and email) to
workers. The delays at DVLA were somewhat worse than that.
--
Roland Perry

[JNugent]

On 19/06/2022 01:17 pm, JNugent wrote:

> On 19/06/2022 08:42 am, billy bookcase wrote:

[huge non-contextual snip]

>> And so I can only repeat my question. If more people are in employment
>> nowadays than ever before, then where are they all working ?
>

> Pubs have shut down because of significant changes in UK alcohol
> consumption.
>

> When I was a boy, my parents were publicans (for a period, anyway). We

> lived in flats above the various pubs they managed. These were
> street-corner pubs in older working-class areas. Of the four pubs I
> remember living in (over), only two still exist and only one is still in
> business.

Purely as a matter of interest, that number of those still standing
(two) has now fallen to one.

News reaches me from the frozen north that the Parrot pub in Scotland
Road, Liverpool, empty and boarded up for some years, actually partially
collapsed some days ago and has now been demolished.

<https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/gutted-remains-former-liverpool-pub-26713144>

I remember that place with some fondness (I was only about 7 years old),
especially the baby grand piano which was unaccountably found in the
living room when we moved in. We had our own upright piano. There can't
have been many households which had two pianos. The other oddity was
that all the bedrooms on the first floor (we didn't use the second
floor) had communicating doors.

[snip]