Vegas shooting

please log in to view this image

 

I never said that. Link, please?

No, didn't think so.

I said, that the rules had changed - which they had. Stan didn't seem to know that.

Then again, I wouldn't expect a glorified estate agent to know that.

I certainly wouldn't expect a simple café owner to know that.

 

That was completed a while back.

We've started several other jobs since then.

Why?

 

As usual your apparent expertise is ridiculed because other people can read what you wrote.

You're ****ing tragic fella.

 

Are you still working with Cornish Clive?

You're tragic fella.

 

You only admitted that they still existed after you’d been rodgered in every hole and had to concede that Stan and Tobes were right.

You forget that people actually read the ****e that wound up with you crying for Stan to make it stop.

Also as a small business owner I was involved with the local council when a large supermarket was planning on building an out of town store. I was consulted on the plans and read the s106 agreements which were a compulsory part of the planning consent.

When you came out with your bollocks about s106 I immediately knew that you didn’t have a ****ing Danny about the subject. The pages that followed demonstrated the total rinsing you took over the subject.

 

Are you sure that you want to go down this route ?

 

"There is no longer any section 106 agreements; that's been replaced with, what's termed, developer contributions."

https://www.not606.com/threads/tax-...at-olympic-stadium.304289/page-3#post-8061523

 

Watch HIAG now say that he only said that as a wind up.

HIAG owned again

 

OUCH! Why does he do that to himself?

 

Link, please?

 

With pleasure. Here's you denying that S106 agreements exist and a few comments later (after getting schooled) admitting that in fact they do:

Got any more denials that you'd like me to prove that you said ?

 

Quentin!

 

I said "link" not quotes, as you well know.

Why are you being so evasive, Pix?

 

nice try at being evasive yourself

Here's the link to you saying that S106 agreements no longer exist
https://www.not606.com/threads/tax-...at-olympic-stadium.304289/page-3#post-8061542

Here's the link to you admitting that in fact they do.
https://www.not606.com/threads/tax-...at-olympic-stadium.304289/page-3#post-8061605

You're going for the full rinse, spin and dry cycle tonight aren't you ?

 

Thanks, Pix!


I will be studying those later for the real gems.

 

The real gem was you claiming that you never said S106 agreements didn't exist and demanding that I provide evidence of you saying it

 

I'm sure you like to think that.

My recollection is that I was referring to the fact that the usual section 106 charges had been abolished for smaller developments. Stan started to pull hard at his pecker and tried to go head to head with me on a subject that I know an awful lot about. It ended with me outing him as an estate agent, I seem to recall.

As I say, I will study that later. At the moment, I'm still working on a licence for a water pipe to cross Forestry Commission land. It is for a rather expensive redevelopment.

Then, I am going to get the family some Chinese.

I will see you again, later, for more ****s and giggles, Pix.

 

Tragic.

"There is no longer any section 106 agreements; that's been replaced with, what's termed, developer contributions."

https://www.not606.com/threads/tax-payers-to-pay-£272million-for-club-to-play-at-olympic-stadium.304289/page-3#post-8061523