When I am King

I realise that in order for me to ascend to the throne, it would require some kind of post apocalyptic nemesis of such gargantuan proportions that the straggling survivors would want to quicken the end of days by electing me as their supreme representative. That said, who knows what lies round the corner, so here goes. I shall add to this periodically.

1. PEOPLE WHO SIT IN THE MIDDLE LANE OF MOTORWAYS. If the motorway is clear, you drive in the left hand lane. If you need to overtake, you use the lane in the middle. If you need to overtake yet more, the outside one. When I am King, if you are caught sitting in the middle lane, you can be as much of a coffin dodger as you like, you won't get away with it. Nothing Draconian as I have heard on other sites (shooting in the face, anything to do with car batteries). Quite simply, you would have your licence taken away for a fortnight. No excuses, that's it. I think this would be sufficient to ensure they did not do it again.

2. PEOPLE WHO CAN'T PARK. I am probably more sensitive to this than others. living and working in central London. I don't drive very often, preferring to cycle as you probably know. However, I often do for work. There are many parking bays which fit three cars. For some reason, often people park in such a way that no other cars would get in. This infringement would get you a parking ticket. But there would be no reduction in paid early. There is no time limit on selfishness. As you can see, I would be a fair and largely benevolent ruler.

3. THE USE OF PUBLIC TOILETS. If you would piss on the seat of your own toilet, that makes you n animal. Please don't do it in public. It's fucking disgusting. If you can't co-ordinate basic motor skills to lift the loo seat, wipe it after. Bringing me on to my next one - HOW CAN YOU NOT WASH YOUR HANDS AFTER USING A PUBLIC TOILET!

It is pure co-incidence that the first two items are motoring related. We shall see how this develops.

Branson - you should be ashamed of yourself

Virgin Media's turn. This is the exchange when I moved into a new flat in Winchester, while I'm on the general topic of extolling the totally apathetic incompetence of telecoms providers:

Me: 'Hi, can you install interbobs and your fibre optic tellymagic thing please?'
Virgin Media (VM): 'No problem. Next available date is a month'
Me: *sigh* 'Ok then. But make sure they come as I'll have to take a day off work'

~~~one month later with no interbobs or satellite telly~~~

Me: 'HI, your engineer's not here, it's midday, he's supposed to come in the morning?'
VM: 'Oh no, we cancelled that 3 weeks ago as you can't get fibre optic in that part of Winchester.'
Me: 'Did you call me, the fucking customer, and tell me?'
VM: 'Not my department. Sozzlepops'

O2 - A staggering example of the worst possible customer service imaginable.

I'm generally a pretty honest bloke. I believe that karma can re-visit you, and why take the chance. So, rather than go to a moody fella down the Tottenham Court Road to get my iPhone 4 unlocked so I could use it abroad, I contacted my network provider. 'Well, Mr MacDonald, you've been on quite a high tariff now with us for some time, and there's never been a problem with your payment history, so that's fine.' I dutifully filled out the 'unlock my iPhone' form on their website, and then waited the aforementioned two weeks before receiving a text saying 'Your iPhone is now unlocked' Note, dear reader, that this is all the text said, nothing else.

I was away on holiday on my own for the first time, and one of the things I was looking forward to was blogging, and twittering, and facebooking etc. Luckily, Thailand is well served with WiFi hotspots.

The saddest thing about this whole debacle is that when I stepped bleary eyed off my plane in BAngkok and went to the AIS shop in the terminal, I was not the least bit surprised when they put in a Thai SIM and it didn't work. 'It's not unlocked' the Thai lady said, in her customary pleasant tone. I showed her the text from, O2 saying it had been, but as you can imagine, I might as well have been showing her the instructions to assemble a particularly challenging set of shelving from IKEA. The lady advised me to take it to the MBK centre in Bangkok where they'd sort it out.

I went there. This is using a day of my holiday, by the way O2. Shall I send you an invoice?

They sorted it out by putting in a gevey chip thing. www.gevey.com if you're interested, but I presume it's some kind of hack chip. It cost me about £35. Can I have that back, O2? Thought not.

I then entered into negotiations with O2 via twitter - this is when it really pissed me off. Precis to follow:

O2: Did you unlock?
Me: Yes
O2: Did you then sync?
Me: Yes [Although, where in your instructions does it tell you to do that? Nowhere, that's where]
O2: Have you synced it with a non O2 SIM before coming away?
Me: No. Where on earth do I get a non O2 micro SIM from, and why do I need to? You told me it was unlocked?
O2: You'll need to find a non O2 SIM and sync it with iTunes for it to work.

Let me insert a brief hiatus here, and also apologise for the swearing.

I'M ON TOP OF A FUCKING MOUNTAIN IN SOUTH EAST ASIA!!!!! WHERE THE FUCK DO I FIND A PC WITH ITUNES ALONG WITH A NICE MAN WHO WILL SUPPLY ME WITH A NICE SIM CARD AND TEST IT OUT.

I then received the following:-

Suffice it to say, I DM'd the number and got no response. None at all. And I told them that quite frankly, no I was not prepared to waste yet more of my holiday pissing about with a phone that should have taken me all of 5 minutes to sort out having followed all their instructions. No apology. Nothing. Throughout the exchange I was polite, and courteous. I understand O2 don't want people unlocking their phones for obvious reasons. But I bet they prefer even less their customers blogging like this, to over 1000 of their followers, then leaving to go to Orange as soon as they possibly can.

I think the saddest thing is that I'm just resigned to it. It's pathetic. Next time, I know for a fact there is a lovely chap on Tottenham Court Road who'll do the whole thing for me for a tenner. It'll probably invalidate my warranty, but the same fella will swop my smashed screen for £40, and their native insurance at £15 a month is a sum I am astonished they have the audactiy to charge. I get more comprehensive cover, including water damage, for £6 a month on my home insurance.

I cannot believe that there is no-one at this company that can see why this is unacceptable. Honestly, I have not been biased here- this is exactly how it happened. Are any of you really surprised either. They are all the same. I could tell you a story about Virgin installing home broadband when I moved to Winchester that I could only possibly file under fantasy fiction. Sky and BT? Don't make me laugh.

In the past, I have lauded O2 when they sorted their 3G network out. Often, when I speak to them they are very pleasant. Someone, find me the nefarious doom-monger who is orchestrating their appalling service performance.

HSBC- the world's local bank.

I realise bankers are not exactly flavour of the decade. However, mine is going to extraordinary lengths to vex me at the moment. I went to Milan on New Year's Eve a couple of years ago (the day I joined Twitter as it happens, very hungover, in Milan airport, at the behest of @jameszabiela with whom I'd gone there.) and was highly inconvenienced when my card didn't work in an ATM I tried in town. Upon my return, I went into my local branch (Sloane Square at the time) and complained. The rather sniffy bank teller told me it was for 'my own good' as for all they knew my account was being pilfered by some sort of international hacking ring. The haughtiness with which this was delivered merely added to my annoyance. My attitude is, if they're so vigilant and customer care focused- they've got your number? Call you? They're quick enough to do so if you go over your overdraft by one nanopenny!

So now, whenever I go abroad, I ensure they are informed. Fair play to them, I thought, protecting the innocent and naive customer from their own folly. They're 'the world's local bank' after all, so they probably know best about travelling. But then I remembered that once I had had fraud on my card- originating from Costcutter in Streatham. My card was cancelled straight away, and a full refund delivered. Doubtless in accordance with come banking code or other- they are not known for their compensatory generosity. Which got me thinking- it's not for MY good at all, is it?

The reason HSBC have such Draconian criteria for this is that THEY don't want to lose the money. I have a few different accounts for one thing and another, and as I'm going abroad in a few days I thought I ought to notify them. HSBC have a facility on their home page to do this. I called RBS which is probably the account I'll be using most, and they said they don't have a facility for this. I got the chap's name, rank and serial number and said 'So, if I'm locked in negotiations with a sarong vendor on Rai Leh beach and having haggled it down to 20 baht I can't get my money out; you will deliver unto me your first born child?'

He said (to appease me) 'I'll make a note on the account, but it really isn't necessary.'

HSBC have such stringent measures because they know that if anyone fraudulently gets money from your account, they will have to refund it and don't get it back. Where does it go from here?

HSBC HQ:
'Charlie, Alasdair's getting money out from a cashpoint in Fulham. He NEVER goes west of Waterloo! Call the SWAT team! De-activate everything on his account! Lock that baby down'

It's ridiculous.

So, imagine my chagrin when I received a letter from them this morning, telling me that from now on, whenever I want to log into my account on the internet, I will have to use a card security reader.

Log in.

Not 'buy the Koh-I-Noor diamond'.

Log in.

A couple of points. This is ridiculous. I do banking all the time at work and at home. It's hard enough remembering keys wallet and phone without having to fanny about with a card reader as well. But worse than this is the sycophantic simpering of the accompanying letter.

'We're constantly evolving how we keep YOU protected, Secure Key is the latest of these innovations... it helps YOU ensure only YOU can access your internet banking...it's sleek design means it should [should? what the fuck do you know about my wallet?] fit easily into your purse or wallet'

So, basically, I've got to lug around a ZX Spectrum everywhere I go so I can access banking online. To me, this totally defeats the convenience of online banking. And my money is fine, old chum, if it gets fraudulently stolen, you'll give it back. A better approach from my point of view would have been something along the lines of:

'We keep getting shafted by online fraud. This is actually costing YOU money, because trust me, anything we have to shell out more than comes back to us - we just raise your charges or interest rates or account fees. Failing that, the government just gives it to us but we shaft you anyway'

What this Portas-esque approach would lack in subtlety, it at least would make up for in straight talking and lack of condescension.

iPhone - Argh! O2 - Argh! 3G in London - Argh!

I have long been a fan of the iPhone. I also have a macbook, and vastly prefer them to PCs. I like the interface, and they seem better suited to music and straight audio and visual media consumption, which is all I really use a home lappy for. I can't be bothered with the maintenance aspect of PCs either; trojans, malware, and viruses are (for now anyway) not things I have to worry about. Grist to the mill of the mighty Apple corporation also. I do think that inspiring such fanaticism is a fine and balanced line for Mr J and co to tread though- as we all know, there is a fine line between love and hate. Their recent staggering arrogance and proprietary behaviour will, in my humble opinion, be the source of their ultimate dilution.

More of that another time. I want to specifically castigate the iPhone, or more precisely it's symbiosis with O2.

I may need some help here, but is it all networks that get no signal in London? Something to do with density/ tall buildings? I live and work in the centre of one of the most vibrant and economic centres of the world. The 3G reception in N1 (work) and SE1 (home) is so bad, I have it permanently turned off. I have wireless at home and office so it's not a deal breaker, but even so, you'd expect better. And then browsing on the go?

Don't even get me started.

To be fair, in the west end and heart of the city, you can turn on 3G and it tends to be ok. In N4, N5, N16, an iPhone 3GS just will not function as a phone at all. I called O2 about this in August last year, and after much badgering, they told me they were upgrading their 3G network in that part of London, and it was best to turn 3G off. I now have an iPhone 4

It's still the same.

Five months later.

In the whole of the northern half of a city inhabited by 7.5 million people.

But as a phone it works fine with 3G turned off- it's just an issue for internet access via 3G.

But hey, that's ok, because as an O2 customer, you get free access to BT Openzones! Problem solved. Except you don't. If you were to take a casual stroll from Angel station up past Islington Green, your iPhone would be constantly connected to BT Openzone. But once you get 50 yds from the station, it will not work. No connection. So you have to turn it off. And then with no 3G, you're back on the 'dot of doom'. 1G reception. I'd be quicker going to the library and looking up the information I required in an encyclopaedia.

Because it seems to me that 95% of BT Openzones are not available for free to iPhone O2 customers. They are pay as you go zones, slaved off business or home hubs, which are understandably ubiquitous in the capital.

Do they tell you this in the shop? No.

Do they tell you this on the phone when you call them? No.

Please, someone tell me, is the iPhone any better on another network?

Even if it isn't, my next phone will, on current form, be the HTC HD-7. Windows 7 is lovely, and it works, unlike Vista which was like a baboon with an abacus. It has a bigger screen, is thinner, costs much less, and by the time my iPhone4 contract is up in about a year, will have all the apps I will ever need.

Not only that, increasing my insurance from £7.50 to £15 a month? At least Dick Turpin wore a mask.

So, do others have the same problems with their smartphones in North London?
Is it iPhone related?
Is it a universal problem with O2's network?
What do you think?

Throw him to the lions! Probably. Or maybe not.

I read that a 32 year old man has been arrested on suspicion of the murder of Jo Yeates. And with it, the sickening realisation that in the minds of many of the population, a sigh of relief is breathed, as this monster is now out of society's way and safely in custody.

A few words about judicial process. I hasten to add that I have no specialised knowledge in this area.

There are a number of instances which may give the police cause to make an arrest. They may be circumstantial, accusatory, evidence based, whatever. In order to question a person thoroughly, it is necessary to remove them from normal circulation and place them at the disposal of the police. Once the suspect has been arrested, more evidence is gathered. The police will then either charge the suspect, or release them on bail to return to a police station after a set amount of time, or remand them in custody until a set date in the future whilst the file is reviewed by the CPS.

If released on bail, the police will continue to gather evidence, and have a threshold past which there is sufficient cause for them to pass the file to the CPS who will then decide if there is sufficient evidence to provide the realistic prospect of a conviction.

All of this is done without the CPS seeing any defence material or mitigation. That starts after the person has been charged, if indeed they are.

The fact that conclusions are leapt to, and speculation is thrown about by the sensationalist media in this country not only ruins people's lives; it genuinely spoils the chance of a successful conviction of the perpetrator. There are a number of tiny issues which can prejudice a jury or a trial - and thank God these safety nets are in place - and the more of this ill intentioned gasbagging that goes on, the less chance there is of this case being solved.

If the man who has been arrested is guilty of this horrific crime, the 'public interest' these tabloids and their sycophants harp on about would be much better served by them shutting up and allowing the judiciary to carry out its function in a proper fashion.

And if you think I'm exaggerating, maybe you'd like to think about how the life of the retired schoolteacher, Mr. Jefferies has changed since his arrest and subsequent release. Not for the better, I suspect.

Grammar and spelling, innit.

Although I definitely didn't think so at the time, I am now very pleased to have studied Latin at school. I absolutely hated it. My attention span, even then, was woefully inadequate and I remember with crystal clarity the reverie I would enter as conjugations and declensions washed over me, if not all of the words themselves. An unruly child, the fact that my Latin teacher had the charisma of a tin of tuna didn't help me embrace the language with any of the passion I devoted to subjects in which I was more interested.

The thing about Latin though, is that it really does help you understand where our language comes from. It is also a very precise language - hence very good at steering away from ambiguity. I imagine this is why scientific phyla are given Latin designations. You know where you are with it. It does, as they say, exactly what it says on the tin. Which may seem obvious, except that so much of today's languages do not. They are, for the most part, derivations of a mish mash of other languages, strewn across the globe as one regime toppled another and mother tongues changed hands at the behest of tyrannical despots. There's bits of Viking, French, and doubtless other titbits rolled up in the words we use every day. We have irregular verbs, words that have two meanings, different spellings of the same word - none of this in Latin. Which is why it is a language that is still highly regarded.

I know that a lot of people are of the opinion that it doesn't really matter if you get the spelling right, because as long as the other person understands what you are trying to communicate, then its job is done. I'm afraid I have to say I don't agree. I think that language gives us identity, and I also think that if you want people to take what you have to say seriously, the very least you can do is present it correctly. I'm not too fussed on the '8 items or less' argument (In case you aren't aware, the correct phrase would be '8 items or fewer'). To me, that's possibly going a bit far. It does niggle me; but then I accept that I am more finickity than most.

I thought that to save me ranting every time I see it, I'd just get the right bits down here so anyone who likes can use it as a quick reference guide. Or tell me to sod off, whichever you deem appropriate. I don't want to get too stuffy about it, and start going into the overuse or misuse of some words (for example the trend to, like, put the word 'like' everywhere...) as I think this is more a reflection of current argot rather than a lazy or ignorant misuse of language. What would really make my day would be if you can spot a mistake in this blog. The last thing I want to do is come over all highbrow, but I can't even look at Facebook now without seething. Our kids use it every day, is it any wonder that we sometimes struggle to comprehend things they have written?

I hasten to add at this point that there is every chance there will be errors in this very piece - I don't want to get overly pedantic about it, and have quite deliberately adopted a conversational tone, not thinking too much about being obsessed with grammatical correctness. I also accept that it's very easy to get frightfully caught up in the finer nuances of inflection and suggestion inherent in different words and phrases. I just want to make a few basic observations.

So, here we go, in no particular order:-

THEIR - means belonging to them. It is possessive.

THERE - indicates something's position. As in, 'the car is over there'

THEY'RE - is a contraction of 'they are'

*

ARKS - a collection of large boats, such as the one used by Noah and a number of animals, to survive during a flood

ASK - to put a question to someone

*

YOUR - is possessive. 'I have borrowed your book'

YOU'RE - is a contraction of 'you are'

*

ITS - is a possessive pronoun, i.e. belonging to 'it' whatever 'it' may be. As in, 'the elephant is known for its fondness of sticky buns'

IT'S -  a contraction of 'it is' or 'it has'. As in, 'it's been great to see you'

ITS' - DOES NOT EXIST!!

*

BROUGHT - the past tense of 'bring'

BOUGHT - the past tense of 'buy'

*

EFFECT - more commonly a noun - Something brought about by an external influence. Can be used as a verb if the agent caused something to happen. For example, 'the manager effected positive improvements in the office'

AFFECT - almost always a verb - To have an influence on. For example 'High interest rates can affect house prices'

*

TO - in a direction so as to reach

TOO - another word for 'also'

*

PACIFIC - a large body of salt water occupying nearly half the surface of the earth

SPECIFIC - having a particular bearing or reference

*

LOOSE - not tied down

LOSE - unable to find any more

*

Correct - 'I would have remembered my coat had I known it would rain'

Incorrect - 'I would of remembered my coat had I known it would rain'

*

It's 'definitely', not 'definately'. Imagine it being from 'infinite'

*

The following are two separate words; not one

A lot

Thank you

THE APOSTROPHE

While we're here, let's have a little chat about the apostrophe. The purpose of the apostrophe is to denote ownership, or contraction.

By contraction, I mean as in doesn't (does not)

By ownership, I mean as in 'the dog's bone'

If you don't put in an apostrophe, it means the word has been made into a plural. For example 'We have over two hundred cars in stock'

Equally, if you put in an apostrophe when you mean to pluralise, you look like an absolute idiot:

'Get your Christmas Tree's here!' NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

REALISE/ REALIZE, etc.

This is an interesting one. Most people (myself included) assumed that 'realize' was an Americanisation, and that realise was the correct spelling. In fact, I was incorrect. Either is fine in this country. In these matters of debate, I refer to Oxford Dictionaries and they give their conclusions here

TEXT ABBREVIATIONS


Due to the shortened nature of texts/ tweets, abbreviations are often used. There are no hard and fast rules here, but I wonder if any of you share my opinions:

ur - You are
yr - Your

m8 - Not acceptable in any situation whatsoever if you are over 14. And even then, frowned upon.

luv - Hell no.

CAPITALISATION

Capital letters are for the beginnings of sentences and for proper nouns. Or acronyms. Nowhere else.

Yours Sincerely - NO


Yours sincerely - YES


When I started to type this, I thought it would be a paragraph or two. As you can see, it has expanded rather beyond that. I'd be delighted to know if you can think of anything I have missed, or if you think I am mistaken anywhere - by all means comment below. And feel free to pass it amongst your peers. Hope you like it, it makes a change from me banging on about Bromptons...

Politically Incorrect...

I like to think of myself as polite. Whatever cruelty, mental anguish, or scathing sarcasm I lavish on people, it is always done with the requisite ps and qs. I've found being pleasant and considerate not only disarms your antagonists, it gets you a lot further than you might expect with usually ambivalent members of 'customer service teams'.

If one is going to have an effective conversation with a fellow being, I find that a good way to start is by addressing the person correctly. In my line of work, I have a tendency to deal with what you might call 'duff old traditionalists'. I find it delightfully endearing that there are still people in society who really appreciate being addressed as 'Mr abcxyz' or 'Mrs 123456' etc, etc. Once a certain degree of familiarity has been acquired, I normally ask (if appropriate) if it's ok to use the first name. It is probably true that working in the environment I do, it's more relevant to me than to a lot of others. Maybe not. I don't know what you do to earn a crust.

A lady sat at my desk today, and started asking me about what sort of thing she might expect to buy for a certain price in a certain area. We started chatting, and it quickly transpired she had two properties, both within my catchment area. She hasn't bought or sold for about 10 years, and has very little idea of what they might be worth or what the best strategy was to adopt to move to a different property, but maybe retain one as an investment, or not, or blah blah blah. You're losing interest already, and to be honest so am I. It bears no relevance to the matter at hand.

Long story short, rapport firmly established, the time had come for me to get down to nitty gritty. So I asked her name. For the sake of argument, let's say she replied, “Helen Smith”.

“And your title?” I asked.

The reason I ask it like that is because all too often if I ask “Miss or Mrs?” I get the response “Actually, it's Dr...” with a bit of a sneer, and do you know what? That's fine. If I had studied long and hard and been recognised for such diligence, I'd want every bugger to recognise the fact also.

Helen Smith responded by scrunching up her face and saying “Sorry?”

Here we go, I thought.

“Well, is it Miss, Mrs, Dr...?” I asked.

“What relevance does that have?” Helen replied, eyes narrowing...

And herein lies my issue, dear heart. I resent the fact that it is suggested that my asking for the correct term of address is assumed to be some kind of misogynistic stereotyping. It doesn't have any relevance at all, Helen Smith. I couldn't care less if you are a Sergeant-Major, a Grand Wazoo, the CEO of ICI, or the manager of Boodles. The fact is that I have a computer system whereby, if I do not input a correct title, it will refer to you in printed letters and e-mails as 'Smith' rather than Professor Smith, or Mr. Smith, or Lady Smith or whatever. If a missive came to me addressed to just my surname, I would consider quite discourteous. I don't think I'd use that company. And yes, you can check every letter and e-mail, but in my job, when we are not communicating directly we send mail outs to maybe 200 people at a time.

I had a Dame once, incidentally. She said “Oh just call me Joyce, dear...” Bless.

I wonder how people feel about this. I am dreadfully sorry that we have a social convention whereby for some reason of tradition, women have their marital status defined by their title in a way that men do not. It would piss me off royally if the boot was on the other foot. However, I really don't think that reacting in a hostile and aggressive way when you are asked, in a perfectly pleasant fashion, how you would like to be addressed is the best way to an enlightened society. I was trying to be polite. What was I supposed to say?