Are you worried yet.

[Wanderer]

In the interest of balance. I think the situation would have been a lot better if Corbyn was PM

FTFY!!

 

[Rwc13]

Moderna: Covid vaccine shows nearly 95% protection

The results add to growing confidence that vaccination can end the pandemic.

www.bbc.com

 

[Felonious Crud]

We would have had free Broadband though

And student grants.

 

[D Walker]

One of our contractors has the same issue returning positive tests for weeks afterwards and the customer refusing site entry, which is also understandable.
Hope they are paying you more than SSP!

Currently getting stuff to do at home.
There is actually guidance on the gov website which says people shouldn’t be retested for 90 days.

 

[Wanderer]

And student grants.

And The aqueduct.....

 

[CatmanV2]

Currently getting stuff to do at home.
There is actually guidance on the gov website which says people shouldn’t be retested for 90 days.

This is the problem with the PCR tests....

C

 

[mjheathcote]

Currently getting stuff to do at home.
There is actually guidance on the gov website which says people shouldn’t be retested for 90 days.

3 months!!
That's no good when you need a clear test to get back to work.

 

[D Walker]

3 months!!
That's no good when you need a clear test to get back to work.

Yep. Indeed. As far as government are concerned from tonight I’m fit to return to work unless I have a high temperature. Therefore if I repeatedly test positive as far as I’m concerned the company can pay me.

 

[CatmanV2]

Yep. Indeed. As far as government are concerned from tonight I’m fit to return to work unless I have a high temperature. Therefore if I repeatedly test positive as far as I’m concerned the company can pay me.

Sounds perfectly reasonable. Perhaps the company will eventually work out that their policy is not necessarily working in their favour

C

 

[CatmanV2]

3 months!!
That's no good when you need a clear test to get back to work.

That would be an employer requirement. They should probably consult some experts . Or read the government guidelines if they don't want an expert view

C

 

[Silvercat]

Hence mandatory vaccinations....,,,,,,,or presumably the same isolation rules will apply?

But is it really from Bats?...we actually dont know yet for sure but rest assured the intelligence services will.

 

[philw696]

Big major event for Renault this coming July has been cancelled.
I can see 2021 ending up like this year sadly.

 

[lifes2short]

seems there's some confusion on the fines, wonder how much money has been raked in and will they need to return the fines and issue a court summons instead, what a c0ck up

COVID-19: Police to stop issuing £10,000 'super fines' over concerns they can be challenged in court

The National Police Chiefs' Council is recommending officers issue a court summons rather than a straight fixed penalty notice.

news.sky.com

 

[CatmanV2]

At a guess, none of them:

"We gave this advice because of a potential disparity between those who opt to pay the FPN and those who see their case reach court where the FPN would be means tested against personal income."

C

 

[lifes2short]

the way i read it is that the larger fines like 10k could and/or can be challenged in court ??, just because someone has a business it doesn't necessarily mean that they are trading at a profit or anywhere near to fit the means test of a 10k fine

 

[CatmanV2]

Means tested simply means you pay less cos you can't afford it. I think that's very different from challenging (as in 'I challenge this cos I didn't do it). I rather doubt retrospective means testing will be applied.

However I'm no lawyer, but equally neither is the Chair of the NPCC......

C

 

[D Walker]

Worlds gone mad.
So people knowingly break the law, and because they can demonstrate they are not making enough money, they can challenge the fine.....
Am I missing something......

 

[CatmanV2]

Worlds gone mad.
So people knowingly break the law, and because they can demonstrate they are not making enough money, they can challenge the fine.....
Am I missing something......

Well, sort of. And I'm still not a lawyer They can't challenge the fine (they're guilty EOF) but they can challenge how much they need to pay. I think. Highly unlikely to be reduced to zero and even if it was, that wouldn't mean they were not convicted. As far as I can see this is about sentencing, not guilt. But again

C

 

[lifes2short]

Well, sort of. And I'm still not a lawyer They can't challenge the fine (they're guilty EOF) but they can challenge how much they need to pay. I think. Highly unlikely to be reduced to zero and even if it was, that wouldn't mean they were not convicted. As far as I can see this is about sentencing, not guilt. But again

C

i think they are saying that they should have issued a court summons on the major breaches and when found guilty the judge would decide what the sentencing should be, either fine or even perhaps a suspended sentence ??

 

[D Walker]

Well, sort of. And I'm still not a lawyer They can't challenge the fine (they're guilty EOF) but they can challenge how much they need to pay. I think. Highly unlikely to be reduced to zero and even if it was, that wouldn't mean they were not convicted. As far as I can see this is about sentencing, not guilt. But again

C

See what you are saying...
In Dave's world......

1. You organised an event for 1000 people - Fine is 10k
2. 428 people can be directly attributed to catching covid at that event - this is the nhs bill...
3. 40 of those people died from covid . Thats x years for each manslaughter......