OK – the building inspectors… This story is nearly as farcical as the Fawlty Towers episode “The Hotel Inspectors”. It all started because we needed full building regulations approval on our new extension. This apparently is because we are a commercial business, otherwise we could have made-do with a “building notice”. I only learnt this gem of information out, today. Because we needed the full regulation, we had to employ a structural engineer. He was then instructed to create a design. We then received a large bill. I then wanted to know why we had to use him on such a small project.
What fell out of this is, that the builder had pressed ahead with works, without full approval from the building inspector. We were told that the building inspector was happy with changes to the structural engineers design suggested by the builder in order to save time and money. What the building inspector actually said, was that the structural engineer would have to approve any changes. The builder progressed and the structural engineer had no input.
Because I was looking for answers on the bill, I contacted the architect and from our discussions the whole of the story came out. In order to work out this chain of events I made 4 calls to the structural engineer, another 4 to the building inspector and several face to face discussions with the builder. It was a very long day. This was lengthened by the impromptu bitch Caesar at 7PM in the middle of evening surgery.
Some of the changes have already been made and the structural engineer is busy re-working his design to adapt to the changes made by the builder, whilst leaving the building structurally sound. Parts of his original design are to be done as per plan and hopefully my telephone diplomacy will leave us with everyone (relatively) happy. I still have a large bill to pay and I have no doubt this has just grown with the further involvement of the engineer and the adoption of his original plan (at least in part).
But … Just when you thought it was safe to go near the internet….
The fundamentalists are back…It seems that no-one can run from these guys – I thought I had finished with them for a while but this story from BBC website – today 31/5/08 neatly summarises just what is actually wrong with these idiots. It wont be long before one of their pals over here gets hold of this story and starts protesting outside Starbucks businesses in the UK.
Anger at 'slutty' Starbucks logo
US coffee chain Starbucks has come under fire for a new logo that critics say is offensive and overly graphic.
The Resistance, a US-based Christian group, has called for a national boycott of the coffee-selling giant. It says the chain's new logo has a naked woman on it with her legs "spread like a prostitute... The company might as well call themselves Slutbucks". Starbucks says the image - based on a 16th century Norse design of a mermaid with two-tails - is not inappropriate. Rather, the image is a more conservative version of the original Starbucks design, which hung above the chain's first store when it opened in Seattle's Pike Place Market in 1971.
'Rubenesque'
It says the image - the longstanding logo for Pike Place bags of coffee - is appearing on some of its cups as part of a promotion, and will remain "for several weeks". Howard Schultz, who bought Starbucks in 1982, described the emblem in his memoirs as "bare-breasted and Rubenesque; [it] was supposed to be as seductive as coffee itself". Although its share price has plunged in recent years, Starbucks has 16,000 coffee shops in 44 countries worldwide, employing more than 170,000 staff. The chain has just opened its first outlet in Argentina.
Based in San Diego, the Resistance claims to have more than 3,000 members across the US and has gained a reputation for espousing diverse conspiracy theories.
No comments:
Post a Comment