allanb

[quote user="andyh4"]Strictly in France the jacket should be yellow (I believe to distinguish you from autoroute and rescue personel who use orange), while in Spain they should be orange. [/quote]I'm not sure about that.  As it happens, I have a yellow one which I bought in France, and an orange one which I bought in Spain, but I don't think the the colour was obligatory in either country.  The EN471 standard doesn't appear to specify a colour.  Certainly there are manufacturers in France who offer at least 3 colours (orange, yellow, green) all allegedly conforming to the standard.

[quote user="Chancer"]Did you really mean that you have worldwide breakdown cover SD, mine and I think all others is pan european which I agree is a lot better than the AA but if it is then it shows what a good assureur you indeed have.[/quote] In my MdP policy, the breakdown cover extends to all the countries listed – and not crossed out – on the insurance certificate (green card).  So it's Europe plus quite a few others, but not world-wide.  I must say that it covers all the countries to which I could ever imagine travelling in my car. All cover related to the consequences of illness or injury, i.e. repatriation etc, is indeed world-wide.  But that kind of insurance goes beyond what would normally be called breakdown cover, I think.

I'm grateful for SD's original post and for all the subsequent information given in this thread.  However, I still have a doubt about what to report in the dreaded Section VIII. SD's advice included this:  If you are exempt from these social charges because you are registered for healthcare under a form S1 or you have private insurance, then none of this affects you and you continue to ignore section VIII. – but later this: If you have income which is subject to the charges, then you complete section VIII. Later posts confirmed that foreign interest and dividends are subject to the social charges – I don't think this is in doubt.  So what if you are registered under an S1 but have UK interest income which is subject to the charges: do you report it in section VIII or do you ignore it? The amounts specified on the form itself – if they are imposables à la CSG, etc – are traitements, salaires, pensions, and rentes viagères à titre gratuit.  These apparently would not include interest.  I have looked for help in 2041GG; but the key phrase there seems to be "revenus de remplacement" and I don't know what that means.  

[quote user="AnOther"]This subject crops up from time to time and almost invariably results in the same answer which is that the German ADAC is pretty well the only option so I'm sure it would be appreciated if you could appraise us of any French companies who offer full and comprehensive breakdown cover.[/quote] I agree with Sue.  "Full and comprehensive" is somewhat open to interpretation.  But if my car becomes unusable because of breakdown or accident, my French insurance covers the cost of getting me and my passengers either to my destination, or back home, whichever I choose.  (That's if it will take more than 2 days to repair the car; otherwise the insurance will pay hotel costs if necessary.)  There is similar cover if the car is stolen. That's in the standard policy, in which the cover doesn't apply unless I'm at least 50 km away from home.  For an additional premium, the 50 km minimum is removed, and there are a few other benefits, including the provision of a rental car in certain situations. Of course there are various conditions and limits, but I would expect to find those in any insurance contract.  My insurer is Mutuelle de Poitiers.  It's hard to believe that no other French company offers something similar. 

I've nothing in particular against Mme Lagarde, but it is remarkable how those who preach the need for austerity tend to be people who are comfortably protected from it.

No, it hasn't.  Now when I try to log out I get messages : (1) "Post not found – The post you requested cannot be found or no longer exists. The administrator or moderator may have deleted the post" (2) "The resource you have requested does not exist" ?

This is bizarre.  I posted the preceding message using a different name (allanbee instead of allanb) but it appeared, as you can see, as if it came from allanb. Then the system wouldn't let me log out – as with "login", it just didn't respond.  I had to close down the browser. Then I restarted it and this time, as soon as I entered the forum address, it welcomed me without even asking who I was. I'll keep trying.  Maybe the problem has gone away.

When I use my usual e-mail address and password, the forum is no longer reacting in any way to the "login" command – neither the little one on the "latest news" line, not the one further down on the blue line.  (I got to the forum by following a link in an e-mail.) It does, however, react to the "register" command.  So I have registered again using a different name and e-mail address.  I'm going to post this and then log out and try again in my normal identity.  If it works next time, I'll assume it was just a hiccup in the system, and I'll come back and delete this message.  So if it can still be read after about 12:40 today (May 23) then it's a request for advice.

[quote user="NormanH"]Methinks that Buffoon Boris, the Bullingdon bully,  and the team of Tory Toffs that constitute Cameron the Clown's Cabinet should think more about the British economy  for which they are responsible and mind other countries' business rather less…[/quote] Other people's business is Britain's business, Norman.  If other people can't buy, Britain can't sell.

I don't think you will have any difficulty.  Visa and Mastercard are designed to be used internationally; I've never had any problem as a result of using them "abroad." It is true that if you use a card to make a payment, or withdraw cash, in a country other than the card's own country of issue, you will usually incur some cost in the form of exchange fees and/or a poor conversion rate.  But it probably won't amount to much in relation to the total cost of a foreign trip. I have only once had a transaction queried because it was "unusual" – but it wasn't in another country; it was in the country where I lived, but it was in a city a long way from my home and it was an unusually large amount.  (It was, in fact, fraudulent.)    

[quote user="Sprogster"]Also with older cars, you can find that the manufacturers no longer supply updated navigation CD's as their new cars work on an updated system, the discs for which are not backwards compatible in the older units.[/quote]There can be a similar problem with older satnav devices.  I have a TomTom which is now classified as a "legacy product," which apparently means that all technical support for it has been discontinued – including the ability to disable the camera data. If I want to use a satnav legally in France it seems that my only option is to buy a new one.  

[quote user="NormanH"]Have you tried Clair's tip of pressing control key and using the mousewheel to increase the size?[/quote]Yes, I can do this – or at least the Mac equivalent, which is the "command" key together with the plus sign, as often as necessary.  The problem is that if I do it often enough to make the text easily readable, the image becomes too wide for the screen, so I have to move back and forth to read it. I believe that too many sites are designed by young people with no knowledge of the reading difficulties that come with age.  (Glasses don't cure all problems.)  And the same applies to product labels, instruction leaflets, etc. I'll stop now, before this becomes a disagreeable rant.

Thanks.

I have an AV which is about to mature, i.e. reach its 8th anniversary.  I don't need the money immediately, and I have no particular reason to change the investment holding. If I simply do nothing, does anyone know what the status of the contract will be?  Will it continue to to be subject to the special AV rules concerning income tax and inheritance, or will it become an ordinary investment with no special characteristics?  

[quote user="sweet 17"]I am all for encouraging amateurs and enjoy live music and have sat through many a youth orchestra, school, village hall, etc concert but somehow, now that I am no longer under any obligation to attend, I'd rather stick to my CDs![/quote] I feel the same way, and I would add another reason for preferring recorded music: I don't have to listen to coughing and foot-shuffling, and there's no risk that somebody's mobile phone will spoil the pleasure. I live in the boondocks, with very few opportunities to listen to live classical music, and I can imagine some people muttering "sour grapes."  But I'm glad I live in the CD era.   

Norman, I think you're right to maintain a link to the P60 since if you're audited that's your only supporting document. I suggest this: calculate 1/4 of your P60 numbers for the year ended 5/4/11 plus 3/4 of the P60 numbers for the year ended 5/4/12, and take the totals as your reportable income in sterling for 2011.  You have the P60s as backup if anyone asks, and if you do this consistently you can't be accused of understating anything, since every penny of your income will be reported sooner or later.  You could, in theory, adjust for the odd 5 days in April by using 96/365 and 269/365 instead of 1/4 and 3/4.  I can't believe that any tax inspector would expect anyone to be so meticulous.

I'm not sure of the answer, but I've seen this question asked on a French forum and the majority opinion seems to be that if you call whoever sold you the phone, they should give you the clé réseau as long as you can quote the original phone number and the IMEI.  (Presumably you can find another phone to make the call!) I didn't see any mention of Orange, but a couple of people said they had succeeded, one with France Telecom and one with SFR. Good luck.

[quote user="AnOther"]When I see advice like that with 3rd party Li-ion batteries, and I've seen it quite a lot, it makes me wonder if they are not Li-ion at all but nicad's instead, you would never really know would you ?[/quote] Just in case there was an error on the label, I found the battery on the manufacturer's website (the brand is named simply as "NX") and the specification includes "technologie: Lithium-ion." But of course you're right, I wouldn't know the difference.

Thanks.  AnO's advice, and the supporting link, seem more convincing to me than the leaflet that came with the new battery. By the way, that advice is also consistent with a brief statement in the user's guide that came with the camera. In my innocence I had assumed that the battery manufacturer would give more reliable information than the camera manufacturer.  Not a safe assumption, apparently.   

I have just bought a replacement battery for a Konica 510 (the original was more than 5 years old and getting feeble).  It's labelled NX and described as "3.7v/Li-ion".  It's a generic, I suppose, but bought from an apparently respectable digital camera specialist.  I'm posting here because I don't understand the charging instruction, which says "Charge and discharge 3 times before use for optimum performance" (my emphasis). But how do I discharge it except by using it?

[quote user="AnOther"]You do write some incomprehensible sh1te PPP !  Just for the record is English your 1st language or are you trying to prove something ???[/quote]I think he's trying to impress us.  As far as I'm concerned, he's failing.

Message deleted (somebody else already answered the question.)

In the end I may have to apologize for doubting the existence of réouvrir.  But my doubts remain.  Le Grand Robert & Collins doesn't recognize it; neither does the so-called Petit Larousse (which is actually quite big).  Also, FWIW, Joseph Hanse, in Difficultés du français moderne, says: [réouvrir] et [réouvert] ne sont pas corrects.  On dit rouvrir, rouvert, bien qu'on dise "la réouverture."  He doesn't give reasons. As for the meaning of se rouvrir (or se réouvrir, if you insist): I suppose it could be said of something like a door.  "J'avais fermé la porte mais elle s'est rouverte à cause du vent" – maybe?

[quote user="pachapapa"]rouvrir   réouvrir [/quote] Not sure what your point is.  Rouvrir doesn't begin with "re", so my theory doesn't apply.  Réouvrir doesn't exist, as far as I know.  (But réouverture does, which is curious.) An interesting exception is répéter, which clearly means doing something again.  But I can see why repéter might be a word to avoid in polite circles.

Again relying on my dictionary, it seems that remplir just means 'to fill' without specifying whether it's the first time; if you want to make it clear that it's a refill you can say remplir à nouveau. The word plein, as a noun, can mean "a full tank", which explains the phrase faire le plein.  But apparently it can refer to other things that may be full, e.g. le théâtre a fait le plein, the theatre has a full house. As for the accent; I find it difficult to know when re- at the beginning of a verb should have an accent.  I have noticed that in words where the "re" means doing something again, it usually doesn't have an accent (e.g. recharger, reconnaître, revenir, recommencer, revoir) except when the main verb starts with a vowel (réintroduire, réinstaller, réunir, réanimer, réapparaître.)  But I don't know whether this always works, and of course it doesn't help at all when the "re" doesn't mean that.