Member Since: 20th Jul 2009
18th May 2015
I've been using head candy (which come with a really nice skull carrying case, for metalhead street cred, and similarly have a choice of ear pieces) but a similar price, and these Shure ones sound really good... may have to experiment... I do know the head candy works though, because I queried the person sitting next to me to check my musical choice wasn't offending and they assured me they could hear nothing ;-)
5th May 2015
for reproducing the J S Sargent, Philip; I'm a bit of a fan of the pre-raphaelites myself
7th Jan 2015
cloudcounter do some research...
... it is originally a pagan festival celebrated around the start of the new year (ie after the winter solstice) - co-opted by christians (and also previously celebrated by both mithraists and zoroastrians, whose main men both had the same 'birthday' as the putative christ and similar life events - just some 100s of years earlier... perish the thought that there has been any 'borrowing' from earlier stories to flesh out that later one...).
However, as Shirley says, it is a holiday for everyone to enjoy: it has nothing whatever to do with organised religion (other than having been hi-jacked by it) and everything to do with being with those you love and celebrating another year and sharing your joys and sorrows. (And yes, my darling hounds were thoroughly spoiled with Christmas meats too - they are the only ones who had any! We had a very nice Quorn roast ;-)).
So stop looking for ways to be divisive and artificially take offence, and start looking for ways to include and be good to each other, huh?
4th Dec 2014
wow that's pretty...
I wonder if I fluttered my eyelashes repeatedly at him indoors... <sigh> ... probably not.
Philip, how long have you got the pretty machine for? You (and probably your neighbours) haven't lived until you use it to listen to Slipknot in all their loud and complex glory - I'd suggest starting with something 'gentle' like The Subliminal Verses: Part 3 - or All Hope is Gone... some people might think some of the other albums are slighly unapproachable (though I can't for the life of me think why...)
Go on, I double-dare you ;-)
24th Nov 2014
how do you delete comments?
for instance, if you'd responded to something, and then noticed that someone else had got there first so it would be otiose to add your six penn'orth?
10th Nov 2014
Thank you for raising the issue in your usual inimitable style!
I agree with every comment on here - it must be more than the 'headline' of men being paid more for doing the exact same job, and it would be very difficult to unpick all the contributory factors, as noted in the responses.
Still, having worked alongside you for over six years now, I'd like to say it is a pleasure to work with someone who genuinely shows no prejudice, bias or favouritism whatsoever, and genuinely values the people (of whatever gender) he works with. You're one of the good ones, Mr F
6th Nov 2014
thanks Shirley - not!
I often wonder why the 'big Four' and other large practices get so much publicity on here. I suppose it's because they get into the news a lot, but they don't actually help other AWeb members, as do Stepurhan, Steve Kesby, John Groganja, Euan McLennan, BKD, etc. and lots of other sole practitioners and small practices who give their help freely without thought of payment, or even free publicity.
I work for a large firm, and have always tried my best to answer technical queries on Aweb (where I am qualified to do so). Sometimes, I don't have time (because the big firms are big on recoveries and not having any unneccessary 'admin' type time, but I still try to give answers when I can: working for the big guys doesn't make us all monsters - and some of us have worked for smaller practices too, and still remember what it's like! I bet I'm not the only one either...
PS: totally with John S on the weird reaction to Elaine, too. She is good at raising her firm's profile? Well good for her and well done...
30th Sep 2014
shum mishtake shurely...
SJH-ADVDIPMA wrote:This is a tough one, if your <sic> extremely honest it seems daft in some circumstances. If altering a date slightly, a date which can never be proved and there is zero resource deployed to catch out those falsifying such dates, then why...
Perhaps because it is unethical, dishonest and contrary to the high standards of probity expected (and that should be expected) of those of us in the profession. I am not qualified to comment on the legality of such practices, but strongly suspect it fails on that front too. By all means do your utmost to help your clients get things right, but don't get caught in the trap of helping them do wrong by rewriting history (or even ignoring the client doing so)...
22nd Sep 2014
is it though?
... if they filed for the next two years, then they were aware of the obligation: to quote the Tribunal "two subsequent Returns were filed successfully on 18 May 2012 and 14 April 2013. When these Returns were filed it should have been obvious to the person filing them that the Return for 2010/11 had not been filed. If the 2010/11 Return had been filed in May 2012 at the same time as the 2011/12 Return it is possible the change in personnel might have been a reasonable excuse for the late filing but as this did not happen Hambleton ceased to have a reasonable excuse from May 2012 onwards and even less of an excuse after the 2012/13 Return was filed in April 2013."
15th Jul 2014
...all Deloitte did was act for them to instruct Counsel
quote <"The company had employed Deloitte to act as instructing party to counsel after HMRC took Icebreaker to a tax tribunal over its scheme."> endquote
I don't see any allegation in the article above that Deloitte was involved in designing the scheme in question - its engagement appears to have been to get them legal advice in front of he Tribunal, which it did.
Accordingly, having fulfilled that engagement (parties duly appeared, Icebreaker found not to work as intended etc), surely Deloitte's engagement and responsibility under that engagement had ended?
Whilst it might have been annoying for Icebreaker to see comments in the press apparently emanating from Deloitte, since they were after the event, they can have had no bearing on the conduct of, or result in, the case... so how is it actionable? (not to mention the 'fair comment' defence)