"The Medway Handyman" wrote in message
...
dennis@home wrote:
"geoff" wrote in message

8

It is no different from someone buying a boiler and asking an
installer to fit it for him

If the goods are faulty, he still has his rights as a consumer

Of course its different.

No it isnt **** for brains.

Wrong again, you agree with what I said later in this post.


He has to get someone to fix it and then claim back the costs from the
supplier rather than telling TMH to fix it.

Anything wrong with the install would be my problem - anything wrong with
the product wouldn't be. I'm happy either way, if I supply I make a mark
up, if the client buys hes can use the input VAT.

If TMH didn't supply it then TMH could just say no as he had
fulfilled his obligation and then the customer has to find someone
else.

Wrong again **** for brains.

How can it be wrong you idiot, its exactly what you just said!


If I correctly install a product whic is faulty - why should it be my
responsibility to sort it out for nothing?

I never said it was. In fact I said it wasn't but you are too stupid to read
what I said.



If you had a clue about business, an example like this cannot be
construed as avoiding VAt registration, unless there is PROOF of
collusion to evade registration (e.g. A letter stating words to that
effect

Of course its avoiding it, who said that it was wrong to do so?
Do you have a guilty feeling?

You are a complete & utter ****ing idiot Dennis with no idea about
business or VAT or anything else.

That has nothing to do with VAT in case you didn't notice, it has to do with
some moron who thinks avoid is the same as evasion and that when someone
says avoid they must really mean evasion.


Stop wriggling like the worm you are.

You need to wriggle, you have disagreed with me several times in this post
only to reply with exactly what I said in the following line!
You really are being thick.