Welcome to Toontastic

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more!

This message will be removed once you have signed in.


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Rayvin last won the day on May 26

Rayvin had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

19 Good

About Rayvin

Recent Profile Visitors

463 profile views
  1. "Worked very hard" = "Had rich parents, could afford privileged educations, had contacts for good jobs, worked about as hard as everyone else just with the advantages of hereditary wealth and class."
  2. Yeah certainly no great loss these days. Don't dislike the guy, but his departure signals the end of the crappy way things used to be done, hopefully.
  3. Willfully ignorant, you lot.
  4. Well said Parky. I fully understand the intended meaning of what you're setting out here, based on the context within which you've applied the word, and applaud your ability to articulate your thoughts with the full lexical range available to you.
  5. Is this about East Asian pronunciation? FFS I just said that you guys were stereotyping the wrong people!
  6. Huh?
  7. I love that the thread below that produces a DM cartoon that instantly invalidates everything the Mail has said in the article.
  8. Is that in the online edition? I'd be fascinated to read it but can't see it anywhere... EDIT - NVM, found it through another source. Really didn't know that the Mail was distinct from Mail online. That's news to me. If that's true, then I actually have to confess that I know nothing about the Daily Mail as a newspaper. I was also surprised to read that they have consistently opposed UKIP. Having said that, for all the examples they've pulled up that show their support for Muslims and justice, I'd imagine that the Guardian could pull up about 50 articles that go the other way. Having said all of this, The Guardian is far from perfect.
  9. In that case I would first speak to the manager who sold the thing to you - he'll presumably still recall the situation and may be able to sort it out before you get to the point of going to serious effort. He may well be able to have the situation reviewed. Following that, I think you've got a good case to turn to them and say look, you sold it to us on this basis, as evidenced by the fact we submitted a form to you. You had plenty of time to tell us that the application had failed, and we would have cancelled the order, prior to installation (I'm assuming the kitchen was a separate installation to the extension). You didn't, and let us continue thinking that we would have the refund. This is flatly not acceptable, and we expect you to address this. Either way, if they dig their heels in I would shame them on twitter initially, and then go to small claims.
  10. What was the basis for your failure to qualify? If the decisions are made on the constant principles, then you may be able to challenge HMRC over it based on previously having attained this exemption. With respect of the company it's a difficult one. Is the suggestion here that you should have paid the full amount + VAT, and that they in turn should have immediately refunded the VAT having carried out an internal verification of the exemption? If that's how it's supposed to work then you're probably right that you can challenge them, as you entered into the arrangement expecting a certain outcome with respect of pricing. Also, when did you make the payment? If it was months ago, surely they should have sent the form off months ago as well, long before the kitchen was installed. This would mean that their delay in processing your documentation has left you out of pocket. You could perhaps then claim that you assumed all was in order. In that sounds feasible, the line of attack would firstly be to ask why the processing took so long, and to point out that had this delay not taken place, you would have cancelled the purchase upon learning that you failed to qualify. Either way, I think some more details about the timeline of events would potentially help.
  11. Nice to see. Plus it has the added bonus of being exactly the sort of compassionate solution that the Daily Mail will hate.
  12. I know nothing about boxing whatsoever, and I've heard enough about this to understand what's going on, despite not having gone looking for it. On that basis alone, neither of them is going to lose.
  13. He should just come out and say that even if it had been protocol, he wouldn't have done it anyway
  14. Firstly, I wouldn't have either. Secondly, I read that actually, he wasn't supposed to. Last time out, Cameron didn't either. May did but shouldn't have.
  15. Skinner is a legend tbf