Jobsworth

A classic example below. Any other examples?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40679075

xmiles wrote:A classic example below. Any other examples?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40679075

what a stupid thing to do!

xmiles wrote:A classic example below. Any other examples?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40679075

How absolutely ridiculous. They say if you pay peanuts you get monkeys.

just read that before i came on here, totally ridiculous but i think these people get paid more if they issue more fines so it's all about numbers and no common sense

What if your livelihood is selling soft drinks to festival goers....a festival you have to pay to have a license for by the way.

Then some 5 year old comes along without a license and undercuts your prices by 75%, are you supposed to just smile sweetly while he/she takes all your custom?

Norpig - if some 5 year old walks into your hospital on Monday morning offering to wash the bed pans for 75% less than they pay you, would you be happy to give up your livelihood?

Rules are there to protect people.

Natasha Whittam wrote:
Rules are there to protect people.

Rules are there to control people!

karlypants wrote:Rules are there to control people!

People need to be controlled.

Natasha Whittam wrote:What if your livelihood is selling soft drinks to festival goers....a festival you have to pay to have a license for by the way.

Then some 5 year old comes along without a license and undercuts your prices by 75%, are you supposed to just smile sweetly while he/she takes all your custom?

Norpig - if some 5 year old walks into your hospital on Monday morning offering to wash the bed pans for 75% less than they pay you, would you be happy to give up your livelihood?

Rules are there to protect people.

Possibly your worst ever post. Is Katie Hopkins your role-model? You completely miss the point. There were alternative ways of dealing with this without causing utter distress to a little girl.....as Tower Hamlets have rightly appreciated and apologised for. If you'd had children, I'm sure your response would have been different.

okocha wrote:If you'd had children, I'm sure your response would have been different.

That's a low blow. Every man I meet has a low sperm count.

okocha wrote:Possibly your worst ever post. Is Katie Hopkins your role-model? You completely miss the point. There were alternative ways of dealing with this without causing utter distress to a little girl.

She's learnt a valuable lesson though okocha, at least now she won't grow up to run an illegal hamburger pitch or ice cream van.

But it's you who is missing the point - this is about the livelihood of decent, honest people. We can't have kids setting up illegal stalls and taking away business from honest taxpayers.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

okocha wrote:If you'd had children, I'm sure your response would have been different.

That's a low blow. Every man I meet has a low sperm count.

or just doesn't want to do the deed with you

BoltonTillIDie wrote:or just doesn't want to do the deed with you

Most men in their 30's also seem to suffer from impotence. Perhaps I should date younger men.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

BoltonTillIDie wrote:or just doesn't want to do the deed with you

Most men in their 30's also seem to suffer from impotence. Perhaps I should date younger men.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

okocha wrote:Possibly your worst ever post. Is Katie Hopkins your role-model? You completely miss the point. There were alternative ways of dealing with this without causing utter distress to a little girl.

She's learnt a valuable lesson though okocha, at least now she won't grow up to run an illegal hamburger pitch or ice cream van.

But it's you who is missing the point - this is about the livelihood of decent, honest people. We can't have kids setting up illegal stalls and taking away business from honest taxpayers.

You're making it worse for yourself now.You sound completely callous It's about a sense of proportion and compassion. The girl is 5 years old and believed she was doing something good. A gentle word was all that was needed, as the council and all right-minded people have acknowledged. It would have been much better for you if you'd just admitted your views are not worthy of you, a lesson that very many politicians need to learn as well. Thank goodness you are not a parent or a teacher.

okocha wrote:You're making it worse for yourself now.You sound completely callous It's about a sense of proportion and compassion. The girl is 5 years old and believed she was doing something good. A gentle word was all that was needed, as the council and all right-minded people have acknowledged. It would have been much better for you if you'd just admitted your views are not worthy of you, a lesson that very many politicians need to learn as well. Thank goodness you are not a parent or a teacher.

Just because someone believes they are doing good, doesn't mean they are. Dougie Freedman probably thought he was doing good when he signed Liam Trotter, but we all know how that turned out.

Perhaps if Freedman had spent a night in the cells for his crimes we wouldn't be in the state we are now.

Actions have consequences, even when you're 5.

Bet the dad wasn't paying tax or NI contributions for his under age worker either.

Fab gets it. If the okochas of this world were in charge the country would be in anarchy.

Ridiculous, a bit of bad press and they fold like a Bolton defence.

Sorry, but sometimes I think we have become too soft as a nation.

From what I can tell reading the article it seems this little 5 year old girl decided to set up a lemonade stand, not outside her home but on a main road on the way to a major music event.

She had the foresight to take a kitchen table with her and by the look of the photo a shopping trolley bag full of lemonade.

This kid must be a real budding Alan Sugar, most kids at 5 setting up this sort of stuff would chuck a blanket in front of there house, crush up a few petals, label it perfume and flog it to the next door neighbour.

Seems to me that the key part of this is that Dad was there and if you seriously think it was the kid that the enforcement officers where directing there rebuke to then I suspect you are way off the mark.

Was the kid upset that Dad got a telling off, probably, should Dad have been using his five year old kid as a cheap marketing tool, definitely not.

Then Dad squeals because he got a £150 fine, about the emotional trauma caused by his own idiocy, and gets let off because the council knows that a bunch of do-gooder's  will feel sorry because of the little kid.

Symptomatic of the culture of today, would not be surprised if he now try's to claim compensation or even loss of earnings.