Hagar

From Brittany Ferries webiste under "Security and Privacy" "We reserve the right to use or disclose any information without notice or consent as needed to satisfy any law, regulation or legal request; to conduct investigations of consumer complaints or possible breaches of law; to protect the integrity of our site and our property; to protect the safety of our visitors or others; to fulfill your requests; or to cooperate in any legal investigation." Probably something similar on all the airline sites and the T&C's of your credit card and mobile phone provider. I know that MOH's former employer ( a government agency) had access to all these details - in the case of cashpoint usage they sometimes did it in almost real time. rgds Hagar        

Just an idle thought - In my experience information given out by Ryanair ground staff on flight alterations/delays/diversions is particularly poor. I remember one day at Carcassone all these people milling about waiting to meet people from Dublin when the plane had been diverted to Perpignan. Imagine all the phones going in this situation - and the revenue for Ryanair. No incentive there for them to improve their information services. rgds Hagar   

[quote user="ErnieY"] And I wonder what mechanism will be employed to actually collect the fee. Buy it in advance with your ticket, PAYG on board ? Would sir/madam like a phone call to go with their scratchcard ? [+o(] I'm pretty thick skinned but outside of an absolute dire emergency, where say you needed to urgently arrange something for when you landed, I don't think I'd have the nerve to do it. Would anybody here I wonder. [/quote] To the end user it is exactly the same as if you are using your phone in a foreign country. Charges for calls and messages sent and received are billed by your own mobile phone service provider in your home currency. As with any other roaming charges a lot will depend on what style of contract you have with your service provider. With some contracts it will be possible to make calls without any additional charges (within limits). So to the end user it is just another service from his mobile phone provider. The airline gets its money from the Inmarsat Service Provider (ISP) i.e the people who actually provide the service(connection) to the plane. There is a whole network of organisations involved but basically you pay your mobile service provider - they in turn pay the ISP - the ISP pays INMARSAT for the satelitte service and any land line network involved in connecting your call and so on. . As to using it - I think quite a lot of people will - particularly the SMS services. " Plane left on time" " Will be late picking you up" kind of messages. Again - for certain kinds of contract the cost of these calls/messages will be included in your overall monthly bill. rgds Hagar  

[quote user="Sprogster"] Also because the system uses a satellite up link, the call charges are likely to be very expensive and comparable to those built in phones in the passenger seats of some long haul aircraft. My guess is around £2 to £3 a minute roaming charge!  [/quote] In theory , and I stress in theory, this new service should be cheaper than the Inmarsat phones that have been on long haul flights for some years. Reason being the new service uses bigger nuch more powerful satellites which can allocate bandwith "on-demand" and the basic satellite services are thus cheaper. In practice, the airlines, the satellite service provider, Inmarsat and your own mobile service provider will all  see this as a revenue earning opportunity and by the time they all get their cut then around £2.00 a minute is probably about right. With a similar system offered on the Cross channel ferries the roaming charge is £1.80 a minute. Rgds Hagar

[quote user="mjw"]Thanks for the posts John & Hagar - all adding to top up my knowledge on these things. Does anyone know if it is typical that you have to go with an installers whole solution or is it easy to find someone to install the groundworks/pool and perhaps someone else to fit your required sanitisation solution?  So, someone to fit the pool/pump/filter, someone else to supply and fit the sanitiser? Possible? Anyone taken this approach with success?[/quote] Hi MJW - hope you don't think I've hijacked your thread with some rather esoteric discussions with Andrew. When we installed our pool I did something similar to what your proposing. Our basic and prime contract was with the builder who actually constructed the pool - traditional reinforced concrete lined with ceramic tiles. Through my own research I identified what type of water management system I wished and in conjunction with the builder identified a local supplier. The builder then agreed to sub-contract the pool equipment supplier and take responsibility for providing a pool "pret-a-plonger". This last step was important as probably the most important thing is to get the sizing right - pump/flow rate, no of inlets/outlets etc , and to have the plumbing correctly sized and run for the system you want to use. Basically the builder and the equipment supplier had to sort that out between them. Very happy with it - Downside - not the cheapest route by any means - particular when compared to the "kit" style suppliers. rgds   hagar       

[quote user="Poolguy"] Hagar has spoken in favour of the Bio UV method and for him it works – Good! But lets be clear-‘ the Revlement’ is Hydrogen peroxide that much I know and he has said so. Hence to be required to put 30 litres of Peroxide in the pool to support the other regime negates its advantages – it is NO WAY a chemical free regime that it claims to be, in fact he is running a Peroxide pool which is assisted by the UV process and not the other way around. Hydrogen peroxide is a VERY efficient killer of bacterium, nearly 10 times more efficient than chlorine, it is so aggressive and residuals are so long lasting that in his pool 30 litres are sufficient compared to nearly 150 litres of chlorine (estimate -PG). It means that by and large once the pool is dosed with peroxide he could turn off the UV process as there is enough sanitization going on already. So I cannot say that it doesn’t work because, with peroxide in the water it clearly does – very clear water, but what I can say and I stand by this, is that the UV lamp by itself will not do the job, for the reasons I have already stated in previous posts. More over, the use of the word ‘Bio’ is a misnomer as it is not ‘Biological’, that is just ‘marketing Speak’. So again I say, if you are happy with it then continue to use it and please do not regards my remarks as essentially knocking this solution – I am merely seeking to explain the truth for other readers. [/quote] I am sorry Andrew – Thought we had let this thread go – You say you are stating the truth but the key points you make above are simply wrong.   Hydrogen Peroxide is NOT 10 or even 5 times as effective as chlorine – rather the reverse. Hydrogen Peroxide does NOT leave residual chemicals in the pool it degrades into water and Oxygen  ( H2O2 = H2O + O) Hydrogen Peroxide in a swimming pool environment is much less persistent than Chlorine – particularly when the chlorine solution has stabilising agents added such as Cyanuric Acid. Which themselves cause problems with residuals. There are serious health issues with chlorinated pools particularly with young people, heavy use AND enclosed environments ( Abris, Pool Covers ???)   If you or anybody else does not believe me then simply google with Hydrogen Peroxide , Chlorine and pools. You will find many commercially motivated articles but some strong scientific references such as –   This from the people who make the stuff – US Peroxide   “By itself, H2O2 is a rather poor microbiocide compared to chlorine, bromine, ozone, and other commonly used disinfectants.”   This from the French Governments national scientific research centre   “The test results confirm the very good killing activity of sodium hypochlorite (chlorine)…….In contrast to that the biocidal effect achieved by the hydrogen peroxide-based products was significantly lower than one log cycle notwithstanding a very high concentration of up to 150 ppm.”   For the health issues with Chlorine check out this site www.coachsci.sdsu.edu/swimming/chlorine/asthma.htm     So – your figures – 30 litres of Remenant – This is at 35% solution – i.e 10 litres of Hydrogen Peroxide – Equal to – 2 litres of chlorine! (estimate -PG)   That is enough in itself to Sanitise a pool of over 100 000 litres capacity with an annual renewal of some 25 000 litres ! – Reallly!   Don’t forget that I don’t actually add any Remenant for 5 months of the year.   You are telling people that the UV treatment is simply not effective – that is NOT the truth. It is in fact the major effective component apart from filtering– The Hydrogen Peroxide is simply an insurance.   And finally – think about this – The more the pool is actually used (unhygienic practices apart) the more effective the UV system is. Rgds Hagar

[quote user="Jonzjob"] I realise that there are several ways and if your one works for you Hagar then that is good [:D][:D][;-)]!! Enjoy it my friend [:D] [/quote] de même ! Hagar

John - I am absolutely sure Andrew's system works just as you say - my point was that its not the ONLY solution. You are quite right that UV treatment on it's own is not enough - for a full treatment you need to add a disinfectant that remains in the water. That is the "remenant" I referred to. BIO-UV offer two types. In both cases the active ingredient is Hydrogen Peroxide. You can also use Chlorine or Bromine which is what the municipal pools in France do. I prefer to use Hydrogen Peroxide as it disperses naturally , reasonably quickly, and leaves no residual in the pool (one less thing you have to control/manage). Yes it is far less effective than chlorine at "killing" but combined with the UV treatment works very well. An added bonus is I can use the backwash for watering the garden.  UV and Hydrogen Peroxide is approved by the Australian authorities for indoor public pools. One of the reasons it is used is that it avoids the build up of chlorine gases that have been shown to cause health problems for pool attendants and competitive swimmers. To repeat - I am not saying this is the only solution - or even the best - but it works for me (and quite a few others judging by the business growth reported by BIO-UV) rgds Hagar   

Andrew -  whilst I admire the time you spend on here giving advice to people with their pools - and can see that a lot of that advice is very valuable- I do have difficulty with your repeated stance that chlorine and the automatic dosing system ( that you happen to sell) is THE solution and every other system has serious faults/drawbacks. To the OP - I installed a Bio-UV system in 2004 in an open pool of 14m x 6m. I have never had a serious problem with the system and am very satisfied with both its performance and the water quality. It was originally recommended by a pool consultant when I asked them for a system that required minimum intervention on my part. The only time I have ever had a "green pool" was when an electrical fault caused the pump to trip out whilst we were away for 6 weeks. The pool is completely open - I don't use a pool cover and I don't shut it down in Winter. From November to April I don't add any chemicals other than a very small amount of liquid PH- (suplhuric acid solution) which is dosed automatically. Through the summer I use a total of 30 litres of BIO-UV Remenant - again dosed automatically. That's 30 litres into a pool with capacity in excess of 100,000 litres. Everybody who has used the pool has commented on the water quality and its "softness".   Downsides are the remenant is expensive - €10 per litre. The initial cost is high compared to other systems.   The repacment sensors for the PH doser are expensive and may need replaced every couple of years (c €300!) . Were I to build another pool I would go for BIO-UV again - Only difference is I would use Zeolite in the filter rather than sand (as recommended by Andrew). Hope that helps Hagar p.s you can see some testimonials for BIO-Uv on their website www.bio-uv.com including a significant number of large municipal pools.  

Not sure about the "planet" comment but in terms of "foreign country" I assume he is making the point that you are effectively roaming. eg. You take the plane from Paris to Toulouse - use your phone on board - your in/over France so you might well expect the charges to be the same as if you were on the train. Not the case. The service is actually provided through a satellite link from the plane. This m,eans you have to pay extra for outgoing calls and for incoming calls - just like you were in a foreign country. rgds   hagar     

[quote user="Frederick"]anybody know whats going on.?...I am curious as I use the beach in the summer and also for the sake of the town hope it is  well gone by then ....[/quote] It looks like it's going to be there for a little while - at least until the next spring tides in April. The "rupture" you heard about was probably the towing cable that broke ending the earlier attempts to get her off. It is not an oil tanker by the way, the oil you saw being pumped out was diesel fuel oil. There are still some ten tons on board and that could make a bit of a mess if the hull was breached. I am not sure if she is carrying any cargo - they have ballasted her down with sea water and they are going to put in some temporary moorings. The big danger is more storms arrive and then she starts to break up.  The other risky moment is when they try again to pull her off the beach. There is some french guy with a blog trying to get up a petition to have it declared as a UNESCO world heritage sight. Some seem to think its the most exciting thing to happen in Les Sables d' Olonne in decades. rgds Hagar    

Val_2 - Do you do quarterly VAT retuns ? or just the annual one? rgds hagar

[quote user="Bobc"]Our business is set up as a SARL and my understanding is that it is a French legal requirement that a SARL must use an accountant to prepare end of year accounts, TVA returns, etc. [/quote] That is not the case. There is no legal requirement for a SARL to use an accountant. In most cases however it is strongly recommended. Going back to the OP - how you reclaim your VAT will depend on your fiscal regime. If your regime is "Réel Normal" then it can operate exactly like Bob describes . Submit a normal quarterly return showing a credit in your favour and you are reimbursed directly. The amount reimbursed must be greater than 760 euros. If "Réel Simplifié" then in most cases you can only demand reimbursement once a year using the declaration CA12. (you should also send a RIB with your demand). The amount reclaimed must be at least 150 euros. There are some special case exceptions (aren't there always!) concerning new companies. Most notably you can reclaim VAT on fixed assets purchased in the start-up quarter - again minimum760 euros. One to watch for is that the FISC will not reimburse you for the first year unless they are sure that the business is viable - you may be asked to show proof of this - This no doubt causes a delay in reimbursement and may have been the case in the example John gives. hope that helps Hagar  

I don't run a Micro but I am pretty sure you must keep your books in Euros - assuming that you convert Sterling income to Euros shortly after receiving it then simply enter the sterling amounts in euros using the conversion rate that you get at the time (or something close to it). If you keep the amounts in Sterling at year end ( i.e you have separate sterling accounts at the bank) then the proper way to do it to set a "budget" exchange rate at the start of the year. Invoiced amounts (and bills recieved) in Sterling are entered into your books as euros using your budget rate.  When you actually transfer Sterling into your euro account you will get the appropriate bank rate. This will no doubt be different from your budget rate.  If the rate is Sterling/Euro rate is lower than your budget rate then you make an additional entry in your books as a currency gain. if higher then an entry as  a currency loss. Same idea at year end - you value the Sterling in your account at your budget rate and then compare that to the actual rate you would get on that day. Normal accounting prudence would dictate that you don't eneter any potential currency gain but should enter any potential losses on currency as a provision. Hope that makes sense. hagar        

Srtictly speaking it is not the RSI who issue your card but the "Organsime Conventionné" (Caisse) that you have chosen. i.e the RSI collect your cotistations but it is the OC that pays for you health service and therefore the OC that issues the card. If your enterprise is new you should have/should get a letter from RSI confirmimg your entitelement and saying that they have passed this information to your selected OC. rgds   Hagar

[quote user="Ian"]Thanks MilkyBarKid I bank with the HSBC in the UK (both for personal and my company banks with them too) they have been great.  We were just considering switching to them here in France ... I'll keep my eyes out for more news. Thanks again, Ian [/quote] Ian - I understand that they will be keeping the old CCF branches - which is probably what you would want particularly if maintaining an account in the UK. (online international transfers and such like only work with CCF not the other regional banks HSBC purchased). I too had personal and business accounts with HSBC in UK and considered switching the whole lot to HSBC/CCF France. However I started first with a personal account in CCF which was actually opened for me by HSBC in the UK.  Having experienced their services I decided not to switch the business accounts but instead closed them down in UK and opened up with Banque Populaire locally. I keep the pesonal account in CCF/HSBC because the internet linking with the UK is superb and it is easy to make online payments and transfers in France. (There is a long but old thread about this somewhere where I describe making an internet transfer from HSBC (UK)  via two banks in France and withdrawing that money from a Credt Agricole cash m/c in Languedoc the next day - most people didn't beleive it). As for the rest of their services , I am not at all impressed, nothing like the level of service I receive in the UK, and boy do they like their silly paperwork. Just my experience rgds Hagar  

[quote user="David_Janet"] How about saumonette?  It's very like (if not the same as) rock salmon and fries really well in batter.  Although the name is a bit confusing it is a white fish - nothing like salmon.  It seems to be readily available in supermarkets and fishmongers and is reasonably priced.   Janet [/quote] Rock Salmon is just a fishmonger's fancy name for DogFish. Saumonette is the lesser spotted kind (in french). Both look like a miniature shark. rgds Hagar Isn't it interesting how you never see ugly fish displayed as whole fish on a fishmonger's slab? (Dog Fish and Monk Fish come to mind)    

[quote user="Russethouse"] What is wrong with it is that Sharia law disadvantages women - please, lets not go backward. [/quote] Surely that is also true of both the C of E and the Catholic Church.?  I am thinking of their refusals to ordain priests/bishops plus some rules on adoption practices. [quote user="Russethouse"] Everyone being subject to the same law is an important part of our legal system. [/quote] Are not both the C of E and the Catholic Church exempt from sexual discrimination laws in England? Why should the Muslim faith be treated any differently.  [quote user="Russethouse"] If anyone wants to live in the UK, it goes with territory, you obey the same rules and regulations as everyone else. [/quote] Sadly , I fear that many muslims living in the UK feel that they are continually subject  to "rules and regulations" that are NOT applied to everyone else. rgds Hagar  

[quote user="Anton Redman"] I do not know what the cross over point is now but because UK has a higher duty on alcohol but a lower VAT rate it used to be the case that above about £ 8 per bottle and assuming the same markup more expensive wines had a lower tax content in the UK. [/quote] Anton - not quite sure where you got your figures and how old they are - but today a bottle of wine has to be around £80 (eighty) before you pay less tax in the UK than in France. The difference in VAT is only 2p in the pound (19.6% vs 17.5%). The UK adds a flat £1.33 per bottle in excise duty. UK VAT applies to the excise duty thus adding another 23p . To recover that £1.56 in extra UK tax the wine needs to cost more than £78. rgds Hagar  

[quote user="tegwini"] 1000 = 'tiny' small  number ?    It is, apparently,   £10 Million,  [/quote] I understand the figures to be - around 1000 polygamous families reside in britain - of those a "tiny" proportion claim benefits. If you think that could amount to costing the tax payer £10 M then you have never lived on benefits. The NET cost to the taxpayer of NOT CHANGING this ruling (which is actually what the original story is about) is NIL. Indeed I understand that if they had changed the status quo - which was put in place by Thatcher's government in 1987 - it would have cost the tax payer more - but not much - we are talking about 100 or so people at most. rgds   hagar 

[quote user="Frederick"]  Even  people coming here are amazed we are actually giving them this money..and their newspapers print articles telling them whats available to them  and how to claim when they get here ... ... Where the money coming from to keep paying these new claims ....not  from more in  taxes people have not got the spare  money to pay more ...they cant make end meet now many of them . [/quote] Sorry - haven't yet read the whole thread - Are we still talking about brits coming to france and accessing the FREE health service? rgds hagar   

Many UK civil servants have two mobile phones - work and personal. I know  at least one person who was sacked by the DWP for using his work phone for undeclared personal calls. Most just simply don't take the risk and carry a personal phone as well. Many employers have group contracts with the mobile providers at special rates and therefore insist that employees use their provider. This often does not suit the employee (e.g the company provider does not allow roaming services) - so they also carry a personal phone. I didn't check where the statistics are coming from - is this actual phones or subcribers?. A quick check reveals 9 mobile phones in this household of two people - only two are on subscription. (must get round to throwing out all the junk technology I've collected over the years.) Even if it is just subscribers there will be a significant overstatement of phones actually in use. If you change (or cancel) your contract from one provider to another then the original provider will hold your subscription open for up to twelve months (in case you want to switch back). That no doubt exagerates the actual number of subscribers. If none of these are the answer then I'm sure Will is correct - MUST be all the illegal immigrants and/or polygamous benefit claimants. rgds Hagar          

[quote user="plod"] but how do you manage that journey in 16 hours? It takes me that long to do Albi to London.[/quote] Doesn't seem unusual to me - viamichelin gives it 13hrs 24mins. rgds   Hagar

[quote user="Bastet"] I know for a fact that they went through security like this as I noticed them in the queue.  Maybe the secret is to dress up.... [/quote] Quite likely they were off duty aircrew - restrictions don't apply to them. rgds Hagar

[quote user="Jonzjob"] Ta for the gen though. It was the 'will it work' that I was after.. [/quote] The simplest answer is it will not work. The codec used in VOIP ( i.e the software that codes and decodes voice into digital signals for transmission over the internet) are optimised for voice not for fax which uses different frequencies. That said I have seen instances when it does work. But these are isolated instances and it certainly could not be relied upon. You may get it to work once but not a second time. There are many outfits offering "fax over the internet" services - would not these suit your needs better.? rgds hagar