-
-
-
-
Rsouth
sacredhart
kiskubai
Qebrus
Soul
Rabicycle
infmz
YaniKani
Titi
ilmariko
User155490...
psg1ben
Benzo
dinosaurpt
returnofthestaff
wldnshinybike
monkdagola
DeadHorse
PhilDAS
chickenbones
kotsm
PhilswitchEngage
moocher
tjmw
jontea
rhb
johnnettles2
Dibble
youClown
C*J*F
ltc
Seager
crow
Layman_Pang
J_a_m_e_s__
Ecurieperil
Tall boy
ibob
Dexter
Arnomatic
jmg412
ojwithbits
Doubleodavey
samdaniel
Chaley
hnkolov
spinnnout
Ottomanotter
adrug
Daithetooth
cyclotron3k
ElGonzo
Jan_p
Hiuhfdzi
damskodonny
neidosi
EasyAndy
gp700 -
-
-
-
-
-
Thanks.
But it's not desperate fortunately, just seeing if anyone had them in a box without a use before I buy new.
Have you tried one of those unofficial banjos? I'm tempted but Ive heard unofficial olives and barbs can often be out of tolerance and so are leaky, so I wondered if those bits are the same.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
That does sound really shit.
Arguably the title of that section should constrain them to not be so free with their interpretation but it might take a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman if they try it on.
The wording is so general that one way of reading that is:
Any losses incurred as a result of you participating in any organised
training for leisure purposes.Unless they give some definitions for "organised" that's vague enough to exclude entire trips if you went with the intent to do some cycling training on a day where a road is closed to only allow bikes or definitely if you plan to do a 5k walk at a parkrun. As the entire trip is arguably a result of your participation in the activity and therefore excluded...
Unless you are doing something professionally or have a track record of winning similar events with financial prizes... You should be fine.
Or just do what people used to do when they crashed a car at the Nurburgring in Germany, pay to get it towed onto the public road then make the insurance claim. Or no sir I didn't break my ankle playing a 5 a side football competition at the resort... I did it that evening on a beach walk...
-
-
I repeat the thanks to @Velocio
I respect you have done the hard work to keep this place going and it's your choice to make.
But you are not alone on this, and some legal expertise might illuminate an alternative path.
E.g. regardless of how threatening the OSB'23 might appear, OFCOM doesn't have the ability or goal to destroy, Section 392 Communications Act 2003 means they have to publish (and then follow) their penalty guidelines. These (last updated Sept.17) are clear on the objective of penalties and "Ofcom will ensure that the overall amount of the penalty is appropriate and proportionate to the contravention in respect of which it is imposed, taking into account the size and turnover of the regulated body."