Home information packs are going to be mandatory in the UK in June
2007. They are intended to make the home-buying and selling process
more transparent, faster and consumer friendly. The packs will include
a home condition and energy efficiency report.

The Government have argued that HIPs will:
· Enable buyers and sellers to negotiate from an informed position;
· Increase openness and transparency, helping to make the process
less adversarial and stressful;
· Help the parties commit more quickly to the transaction, shortening
the period of uncertainty between acceptance of an offer and contract
exchange;
· Increase certainty by avoiding unwelcome surprises which may
otherwise cause renegotiation and transaction failures after terms have
been agreed;
· Reduce wasted costs resulting from high rates of failed
transactions;
· Help shorten the overall transaction timescale.
However, it means that if you want to sell your house you will have to
pay for a pack up front £700 - £1000 and some to the elements will
have to be renewed every 3 months. What happens if you don't sell, what
happens if you the survey is inaccurate and you don't agree with it,
what's to stop the buyer simply dropping their offer at a later date
any way just because they think they can?

I'm just not sure that this system isn't just creating jobs for the
boys and loads of additional expense for the seller. If any one out
there sees it differently or can allay my fears let me know.

Any thoughts?

On 3 Mar 2006 14:16:08 -0800, "
wrote:

Home information packs are going to be mandatory in the UK in June
2007. They are intended to make the home-buying and selling process
more transparent, faster and consumer friendly. The packs will include
a home condition and energy efficiency report.

The Government have argued that HIPs will:
· Enable buyers and sellers to negotiate from an informed position;
· Increase openness and transparency, helping to make the process
less adversarial and stressful;
· Help the parties commit more quickly to the transaction, shortening
the period of uncertainty between acceptance of an offer and contract
exchange;
· Increase certainty by avoiding unwelcome surprises which may
otherwise cause renegotiation and transaction failures after terms have
been agreed;
· Reduce wasted costs resulting from high rates of failed
transactions;
· Help shorten the overall transaction timescale.
However, it means that if you want to sell your house you will have to
pay for a pack up front £700 - £1000 and some to the elements will
have to be renewed every 3 months. What happens if you don't sell, what
happens if you the survey is inaccurate and you don't agree with it,
what's to stop the buyer simply dropping their offer at a later date
any way just because they think they can?

I'm just not sure that this system isn't just creating jobs for the
boys and loads of additional expense for the seller. If any one out
there sees it differently or can allay my fears let me know.

Any thoughts?

Your last comment is quite correct. It's jobs for the boys, jobs for
the unemployable and jobs for the jobsworths to run it all.

It's bad for two reasons that immediately spring to mind:

- Government interference in a private transaction between
individuals.

- Pack is paid for by vendor. This is fundamentally unsound as a
business practice from the buyer's perspective.


As a buyer, I would want to commission my own survey and evaluation of
the property anyway. If there is something wrong with the property
that I feel should reduce the price, then I ask the vendor to do so,
negotiate or walk away. It's really not difficult and doesn't need
the intervention of the nanny state.



--

..andy

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
news
- Government interference in a private transaction between
individuals.

Matt, you are a pervo.

But would a survey either buyer or seller got in addition to the
official Home Info Pack carry any weight anymore? Wouldn't it mean
that once an offer had been put in that that was it, as all the
(admissable) information would be on the table at the beginning. So the
price agreed at the beginning was the one it had been agreed the
property was worth.

On Sat, 4 Mar 2006 01:28:35 -0000, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
news
- Government interference in a private transaction between
individuals.

Matt, you are a pervo.

Interesting comment from one who carries out "transactions" with
himself....



--

..andy

"Andy Hall" akak Matt wrote in message
...
On Sat, 4 Mar 2006 01:28:35 -0000, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
news
- Government interference in a private transaction between
individuals.

Matt, you are a pervo.

Interesting comment from one who carries out "transactions" with
himself....

Matt/Lord Hall, you are still a pervo.

On Sat, 4 Mar 2006 10:36:26 -0000, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


"Andy Hall" akak Matt wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 4 Mar 2006 01:28:35 -0000, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
news
- Government interference in a private transaction between
individuals.

Matt, you are a pervo.

Interesting comment from one who carries out "transactions" with
himself....

Matt/Lord Hall, you are still a pervo.

So have you confused yourself now and can't remember which name you
applied to which person?

Try to stick to doing one thing at a time. It's best for you.


--

..andy

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 4 Mar 2006 10:36:26 -0000, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


"Andy Hall" akak Matt wrote in message
. ..
On Sat, 4 Mar 2006 01:28:35 -0000, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
news
- Government interference in a private transaction between
individuals.

Matt, you are a pervo.

Interesting comment from one who carries out "transactions" with
himself....

Matt/Lord Hall, you are still a pervo.

So have you confused yourself
now and can't remember which name you
applied to which person?

All the same person Matt/Lord Hall.

Try to stick to doing one thing at a time. It's best for you.

I see you can work well being two persons at the same time.

wrote:

The Government have argued that HIPs will:
· Enable buyers and sellers to negotiate from an informed position;

Only works if the buyers (and their lenders) trust the information in
the pack. Many lenders have stated that they will not.

· Increase openness and transparency, helping to make the process
less adversarial and stressful;

Increase the chances of deception in reality.

· Help the parties commit more quickly to the transaction, shortening
the period of uncertainty between acceptance of an offer and contract
exchange;

It might speed up some of the conveyancing tasks. The survey / financial
parts of the transaction seem unlikely to be helped much though.

· Increase certainty by avoiding unwelcome surprises which may
otherwise cause renegotiation and transaction failures after terms have
been agreed;

Until contracts are exchanged renegotiation is still going to happen though.

· Reduce wasted costs resulting from high rates of failed
transactions;

Increase waste by adding extra surveys (one for the pack, another the
buyers/lenders trust!)

· Help shorten the overall transaction timescale.

Given the success of govt. legislation achieving its stated aims (i.e.
it more typically achieves the exact opposite) that ought to be worrying!

However, it means that if you want to sell your house you will have to
pay for a pack up front £700 - £1000 and some to the elements will
have to be renewed every 3 months. What happens if you don't sell, what

Then the exercise just cost you a grand.

happens if you the survey is inaccurate and you don't agree with it,

Complain to the surveyor, or more likely get another one.

Here seems to be one area where things can go pear shaped. If you were a
vendor with a (non obvious) secret to hide (serious structural problem,
dry rot etc) you can presumably commission additional surveys until you
get one that does not spot the fault - then that is the one you use in
the pack.

what's to stop the buyer simply dropping their offer at a later date
any way just because they think they can?

Nothing. In fact it will probably encourage it - after all the buyer has
already committed money to the pack, and some elements of which may now
be getting past their sell by date - so they have extra incentive to
complete the transaction, even if it means taking a hit they might
otherwise have not considered.

I'm just not sure that this system isn't just creating jobs for the
boys and loads of additional expense for the seller. If any one out
there sees it differently or can allay my fears let me know.

One worrying aspect on the the creating jobs for the boys front is going
to be the lack of suitable surveyors at the launch of the scheme. Govt
had hoped to have many thousands trained and ready to go - anticipating
many would come from a building or surveying background. The reality is
they only have a fraction of the anticipated numbers so far, and most
seem to be from non relevant backgrounds.


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

John Rumm wrote:
wrote:

The Government have argued that HIPs will:
· Enable buyers and sellers to negotiate from an informed position;

Only works if the buyers (and their lenders) trust the information in
the pack. Many lenders have stated that they will not.

the survey information is sold to the seller, not the buyer, and this
creates an unsatisfactory business/legal situation between surveyor and
buyer.


· Increase openness and transparency, helping to make the process
less adversarial and stressful;

how is having to find another grand when youre so broke you have to
sell going to reduce stress?? While I dont want to state the damn
obvious, but it seems its needed he are people in financial trouble
now going to unable to sell legally? Raising another thousand pre-sale
is out of the question for many in such a situation. Perhaps there will
be new schemes where company A pays for the survey then takes 2 grand
from the sale price later - people will be even more badly stung than
now. Reduce stress my arse.

How does one more thing to organise and pay through the nose for reduce
stress anyway?


Increase the chances of deception in reality.

definetely. The surveyor is not answerable to the buyer, works in the
seller's interest now, and the seller can cherry pick the survey, as
you say further down. Also since some surveyors just want to maximise
business, they will offer what the client wants, as good a survey as
they can possibly think of any excuse to give. We all know about
plausible denial. Its a fundamentally unsound system.

Most houses today are sold without any survey beyond a basic valuation.
When every sale is subject to survey, the skill level of the surveyors
will inevitably drop dramatically, as the present cherry picking of
students will no longer be an option. Surveys are patchy enough
already, under the new system theyll be a shambles.


· Help the parties commit more quickly to the transaction, shortening
the period of uncertainty between acceptance of an offer and contract
exchange;

with a dodgy survey the uncertainty is still there. When the buyer
commissions a survey and the 2 conflict, the uncertainty will be more
not less, and go on much longer.

It will improve knowledge level for those currently buying wtih no
survey, but those people are choosing, as adults exercising their own
free will, to not pay for the survey. Clearly the majoprity of the
population does not believe the survey cost to be money well spent. Is
a nanny government forcing them to spend more money (the survey cost
will just be added to the sale price) at the very time they are least
able to spend on extras, and when they very clearlty dont want to
spend, a good thing?

Why really does the govt want to force every citizen to pay a closed
shop several times per life for a product they dont even want to buy?
Is this a recurring theme of this govt? Do you want your money, choices
and freedoms taken away piece by piece? I sure dont. What puzzles me is
why the British public seem so unaware of the game being played. In the
US these concepts are part of basic education for all.


It might speed up some of the conveyancing tasks. The survey / financial
parts of the transaction seem unlikely to be helped much though.

each buyer survey that conflicts with the seller survey will greatly
slow and complicate matters. And for reasons above these will become
common.


· Increase certainty by avoiding unwelcome surprises which may
otherwise cause renegotiation and transaction failures after terms have
been agreed;

Until contracts are exchanged renegotiation is still going to happen though.

yes, present negotiations are mostly just excuses to make a lower
offer, not genuine reasons. This practice will contiue anyway, just
different excuses will be needed, such as 'my lender has now said we
can only have...' 'but we realised...' Same game will continue.


· Reduce wasted costs resulting from high rates of failed
transactions;

Increase waste by adding extra surveys (one for the pack, another the
buyers/lenders trust!)

and a 3rd after the first 2 conflict


· Help shorten the overall transaction timescale.

Given the success of govt. legislation achieving its stated aims (i.e.
it more typically achieves the exact opposite) that ought to be worrying!

surveyors will be in short supply, waiting times will be long.
a buyer survey will still be wanted in some cases as before
when the 2 surveys conflict, it will take ages to sort out.
quick no-survey transactions will no longer be possible.


However, it means that if you want to sell your house you will have to
pay for a pack up front £700 - £1000 and some to the elements will
have to be renewed every 3 months. What happens if you don't sell, what

Then the exercise just cost you a grand.

happens if you the survey is inaccurate and you don't agree with it,

Complain to the surveyor, or more likely get another one.

This will be a real problem in a lot of cases. Builders and surveyors
looking at housing types theyre not familiar with do reach the wrong
conclusions some of the time. A well known goof is the assumption that
all Victorian houses have non-cavity walls. What happens when seller
and surveyor dont agree on basic facts, or when seller thinks the
survey complete tosh? Now they just shrug and wait for the next buyer,
but with the new system there will be a real problem there.


I'm just not sure that this system isn't just creating jobs for the
boys and loads of additional expense for the seller. If any one out
there sees it differently or can allay my fears let me know.

of course. Neither buyers nor sellers want it (most are not paying for
surveys now). Government will get another revenue stream from it
though, which will be extracted from us with legal punishment for
anyone who refuses to pay. Sounds more like extortion than acting in
the interests of the citizens.


NT

On 4 Mar 2006 07:44:32 -0800 wrote :
how is having to find another grand when youre so broke you have to
sell going to reduce stress?? While I dont want to state the damn
obvious, but it seems its needed he are people in financial
trouble now going to unable to sell legally? Raising another thousand
pre-sale is out of the question for many in such a situation.

At least one of the firms that will be offering HIPs has said that they
will provide 6 months (or time taken to sell if shorter) interest free
credit. If you need the money quickly the discipline of having to get
all the docs together before you market the property is not going to do
you any harm and should help ensure a quick sale once an offer is
accepted and made.

Personally I think the concept a good one at the lower end of the
market where most buyers currently don't get any survey and just rely
on the BS valuation.

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk
Free SEDBUK boiler database browser http://www.sda.co.uk/qsedbuk.htm
[Latest version QSEDBUK 1.12 released 8 Dec 2005]

On Sat, 04 Mar 2006 17:15:19 GMT, Tony Bryer
wrote:

On 4 Mar 2006 07:44:32 -0800 wrote :
how is having to find another grand when youre so broke you have to
sell going to reduce stress?? While I dont want to state the damn
obvious, but it seems its needed he are people in financial
trouble now going to unable to sell legally? Raising another thousand
pre-sale is out of the question for many in such a situation.

At least one of the firms that will be offering HIPs has said that they
will provide 6 months (or time taken to sell if shorter) interest free
credit. If you need the money quickly the discipline of having to get
all the docs together before you market the property is not going to do
you any harm and should help ensure a quick sale once an offer is
accepted and made.

Personally I think the concept a good one at the lower end of the
market where most buyers currently don't get any survey and just rely
on the BS valuation.

How such a condition can be legally imposed on the seller, yet be
optional in terms of acceptance for those in the industry who's
excessive profits might be limited by such acceptance, is
representative of the current injustices in law making.
--
Regards,
Mike Halmarack

Drop the EGG to email me.

The only people it will seem to benefit are the firms set up to manage
the accreditation, and sell the training.

It is being promoted as a means for unqualified people to do some
training pay licence fee and then to become a "surveyor". It takes much
more training and experience than that to be able to conduct a building
survey - well an meaningful building survey to be more precise.

From what I have seen, the reports will be no better than the current
'Hombuyers Survey and Valuation' - a tick list. The buyers will think
that a comprehensive survey has been done, and may well be in for a
shock after the purchase. But at least they will get to know the
properties energy rating.

dg

On 4 Mar 2006 14:14:09 -0800, "dg" wrote:

The only people it will seem to benefit are the firms set up to manage
the accreditation, and sell the training.

It is being promoted as a means for unqualified people to do some
training pay licence fee and then to become a "surveyor". It takes much
more training and experience than that to be able to conduct a building
survey - well an meaningful building survey to be more precise.

From what I have seen, the reports will be no better than the current
'Hombuyers Survey and Valuation' - a tick list. The buyers will think
that a comprehensive survey has been done, and may well be in for a
shock after the purchase. But at least they will get to know the
properties energy rating.

dg


That assumes that they can measure.


--

..andy

wrote:

I wondered it mortgage lenders would offer to wrap the cost of getting
an HIP for the property you are selling into the money they are lending
you to get your next house? But then would that mean they'd add it to
the mortgage amount and charge interest to you for the next 15 years?

I am sure there wil be plenty of orgaisations that will gladly absorb
the cost of the HIP for you, and then have you pay for it several times
over later!

It would seem natural that estate agents might offer this as a service -
adding the (retail) price to their fee for you to pay out of the sale
proceeds. Assuming they have a cosy agreement with local surveyors or
one of the national conveyancing organisations (like movewithus etc)
then it is just an extra profit centre for them since they should be
able to negotiate a nice volume discount.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Sun, 05 Mar 2006 13:28:25 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

wrote:

I wondered it mortgage lenders would offer to wrap the cost of getting
an HIP for the property you are selling into the money they are lending
you to get your next house? But then would that mean they'd add it to
the mortgage amount and charge interest to you for the next 15 years?

I am sure there wil be plenty of orgaisations that will gladly absorb
the cost of the HIP for you, and then have you pay for it several times
over later!

It would seem natural that estate agents might offer this as a service -
adding the (retail) price to their fee for you to pay out of the sale
proceeds. Assuming they have a cosy agreement with local surveyors or
one of the national conveyancing organisations (like movewithus etc)
then it is just an extra profit centre for them since they should be
able to negotiate a nice volume discount.

It could be interesting to do some research into who has been lobbying
for this.



--

..andy

On 5 Mar 2006 07:31:32 -0800, wrote:

Why do you not want the basic
freedom to make your own decisions as a grown up, in pursuit of the
best life you can lead?

I do! When will it be available?
--
Regards,
Mike Halmarack

Drop the EGG to email me.

Andy Hall wrote:
On 4 Mar 2006 14:14:09 -0800, "dg" wrote:

The only people it will seem to benefit are the firms set up to manage
the accreditation, and sell the training.

It is being promoted as a means for unqualified people to do some
training pay licence fee and then to become a "surveyor". It takes much
more training and experience than that to be able to conduct a building
survey - well an meaningful building survey to be more precise.

From what I have seen, the reports will be no better than the current
'Hombuyers Survey and Valuation' - a tick list. The buyers will think
that a comprehensive survey has been done, and may well be in for a
shock after the purchase. But at least they will get to know the
properties energy rating.

dg

That assumes that they can measure.

Thats unfortunately more realistic than it sounds. The very few people
that have tried (one was qualified and looked at heating system and
building personally) were unable to get the energy consumption of this
place right. Or even close.


NT

On 5 Mar 2006 13:50:48 -0800, wrote:

Andy Hall wrote:
On 4 Mar 2006 14:14:09 -0800, "dg" wrote:

The only people it will seem to benefit are the firms set up to manage
the accreditation, and sell the training.

It is being promoted as a means for unqualified people to do some
training pay licence fee and then to become a "surveyor". It takes much
more training and experience than that to be able to conduct a building
survey - well an meaningful building survey to be more precise.

From what I have seen, the reports will be no better than the current
'Hombuyers Survey and Valuation' - a tick list. The buyers will think
that a comprehensive survey has been done, and may well be in for a
shock after the purchase. But at least they will get to know the
properties energy rating.

dg

That assumes that they can measure.

Thats unfortunately more realistic than it sounds. The very few people
that have tried (one was qualified and looked at heating system and
building personally) were unable to get the energy consumption of this
place right. Or even close.


NT


I despair. There are ready reckoners to do that, PC programs. Even
doing it by hand only requires the ability to add and multiply using a
calculator and looking up of numbers in a book. Primary school
arithmetic. First form physics. Or at least it was.


--

..andy

On Sun, 05 Mar 2006 23:01:01 +0000, Andy Hall
wrote:


I despair. There are ready reckoners to do that, PC programs. Even
doing it by hand only requires the ability to add and multiply using a
calculator and looking up of numbers in a book. Primary school
arithmetic. First form physics. Or at least it was.

Sadly, school curriculum doesn't seem to cover Real Life. All that it
covers is the ability to pass "SATS" tests. In reality nowadays the
whole school life is wasted as far as RL is concerned - any useful
education (possibly) takes place at "further education" places - at
further cost to the taxpayer, or to industry (at further cost to the
ultimate customer).

At primary school I could use a slide-rule (am I showing my age?!) and
do simultaneous equations. Apparently even logarithms aren't
introduced to schoolchildren nowadays until sixth-form (or whatever
it's called) even though such things as decibels are based on them.

Even practical skills such as wood and metal work are rarely taught in
schools, except perhaps at a very basic level. Haunched stopped
mortice and tenon joints were no real problem hrrumph years ago in 3rd
year grammar-technical school; nor were drawings in first or
third-angle projection.

I sincerely believe that taxpayers' money is totally wasted in most
"comprehensive" schools.

--
Frank Erskine

In article ,
Frank Erskine wrote:
Even practical skills such as wood and metal work are rarely taught in
schools, except perhaps at a very basic level. Haunched stopped
mortice and tenon joints were no real problem hrrumph years ago in 3rd
year grammar-technical school; nor were drawings in first or
third-angle projection.

So tell us where you had got to in the first 60 hours of lessons... ;-)

--
John Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com 0845 006 8822
Qercus magazine FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 www.finnybank.com
Qercus - the best guide to RISC OS computing

On Sun, 5 Mar 2006 23:46:27 +0000 (UTC), Frank Erskine
wrote:

Even practical skills such as wood and metal work are rarely taught in
schools, except perhaps at a very basic level.

? Both my children went to a state Comprehensive school (one is still
there in the 6th form and one now at Uni) and both had compulsary
Resistant Materials (wookwork/metalwork to you and me) Textiles
(needlework) and Food Tech (cookery) for the first three years of high
school and were encouraged (almost forced...) to take one of them to
GCSE level.

Both kids (one girl, one boy) can handle power tools (including a
lathe), use a sewing machine and cook a meal.

What more are schools expected to do?

Certainly when I was at (an all girls) school we never got the
opportunity to do any form of woodwork/metalwork or technical drawing
and my husband (who went to an all boys school) never had the
opportunity to do any form of needlework.

Schools have actually improved in this "basic skills" area over the
past thirty years!

--

Sometimes a majority only means that all the fools are on the same side.

In article ,
Gully Foyle wrote:
What more are schools expected to do?

There is much excellent work done within the timetabled restrictions. As a
teacher trained in Technology I'm disappointed that the subject has been
watered down - but still found time to teach the use of a range of hand tools,
technical drawing, problem solving, permitted power tools (eg pillar drill but
not band saw), demonstrate use of non-permiited power tools, and take a team
of kids to the final of the Steel Challenge Competition. What there generally
isn't time for is long-term projects - but then all kids learn all aspects of
Technology, and in school I never encountered IT, textiles, food technology,
business studies, nor studied aspects of industrial production methods. Indeed
- at my grammar (not technical grammar) school we didn't even touch upon
metalwork nor work in plastics either.

--
John Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com 0845 006 8822
Qercus magazine FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 www.finnybank.com
Qercus - the best guide to RISC OS computing

The message
from Gully Foyle contains these words:

Both kids (one girl, one boy) can handle power tools (including a
lathe), use a sewing machine and cook a meal.

I'm amazed how few kids are taught to cook by their parents. My 8yo can
do several basic dishes (though he has trouble getting a roux to work
without lumps) and even the 3yo is taking an interest, making eggy bread
and cheese on toast etc.

--
Skipweasel
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

Andy Hall wrote:
On 5 Mar 2006 13:50:48 -0800, wrote:
Andy Hall wrote:
On 4 Mar 2006 14:14:09 -0800, "dg" wrote:

The only people it will seem to benefit are the firms set up to manage
the accreditation, and sell the training.

It is being promoted as a means for unqualified people to do some
training pay licence fee and then to become a "surveyor". It takes much
more training and experience than that to be able to conduct a building
survey - well an meaningful building survey to be more precise.

From what I have seen, the reports will be no better than the current
'Hombuyers Survey and Valuation' - a tick list. The buyers will think
that a comprehensive survey has been done, and may well be in for a
shock after the purchase. But at least they will get to know the
properties energy rating.

dg

That assumes that they can measure.

Thats unfortunately more realistic than it sounds. The very few people
that have tried (one was qualified and looked at heating system and
building personally) were unable to get the energy consumption of this
place right. Or even close.

I despair. There are ready reckoners to do that, PC programs. Even
doing it by hand only requires the ability to add and multiply using a
calculator and looking up of numbers in a book. Primary school
arithmetic. First form physics. Or at least it was.

The problem I see over and over is people cant be bothered to get the
basic facts right. The last one, who looked at the place personally,
could not be bothered to establish the type(s) of building
construction, which of course is key to energy consumption figures. Nor
could he be bothered to ask how the existing system performed, which
would have been a simple check on his errors. He ended up recommending
a boiler of about twice the required rating. Unfortunately a ready
reckoner would probably not have picked up his mistakes.

As for physically measuring, same story here, not bothering, and
producing erroneous information and inappropriate recommendations as a
result. Imho the British workforce is in a lot of cases rather lazy.
Not all of course.


NT