[WILLIS]

competent is to have both practical experience and qualification

SO what you're saying is that by your convoluted definition to be competent we have to do a qualification, which AS LUCK WOULD HAVE IT you happen to provide.  Uncanny that is

Why dont you stop spamming this forum, and least tell us how much you claim from the government for each window cleaner you con into doing one of your pointless NVQs.  How much is it?  is it £500?

Let me spell something out to you DR Windows

You can comment all you like on this forum but the minute you start quoting incorrect and libellous information you will need to back it up and that will always go for any other forum user.

For your benefit

Libel is when a person's name or reputation is brought into disrepute as a result of something which has been written and published...just writing something libellous isn't enough - it must be read by another.

So the statement(s) must be made...about a particular person or class of persons...the statement must be read by others and it must be such as to cause the readers to hold the subject in contempt or disdain

[Ian Lancaster]

competent is to have both practical experience and qualification

SO what you're saying is that by your convoluted definition to be competent we have to do a qualification, which AS LUCK WOULD HAVE IT you happen to provide.  Uncanny that is

Why dont you stop spamming this forum, and least tell us how much you claim from the government for each window cleaner you con into doing one of your pointless NVQs.  How much is it?  is it £500?

Let me spell something out to you DR Windows

You can comment all you like on this forum but the minute you start quoting incorrect and libellous information you will need to back it up and that will always go for any other forum user.

For your benefit

Libel is when a person's name or reputation is brought into disrepute as a result of something which has been written and published...just writing something libellous isn't enough - it must be read by another.

So the statement(s) must be made...about a particular person or class of persons...the statement must be read by others and it must be such as to cause the readers to hold the subject in contempt or disdain

I agree that we shouldn't indulge in libellous statements, points such as DR has made can be expressed effectively without using libellous language.

On the other hand, of course, the person being libelled has to demonstrate that the statements made really are libellous.  It's not enough simply to say that they are.

[WILLIS]

competent is to have both practical experience and qualification

SO what you're saying is that by your convoluted definition to be competent we have to do a qualification, which AS LUCK WOULD HAVE IT you happen to provide.  Uncanny that is

Why dont you stop spamming this forum, and least tell us how much you claim from the government for each window cleaner you con into doing one of your pointless NVQs.  How much is it?  is it £500?

Let me spell something out to you DR Windows

You can comment all you like on this forum but the minute you start quoting incorrect and libellous information you will need to back it up and that will always go for any other forum user.

For your benefit

Libel is when a person's name or reputation is brought into disrepute as a result of something which has been written and published...just writing something libellous isn't enough - it must be read by another.

So the statement(s) must be made...about a particular person or class of persons...the statement must be read by others and it must be such as to cause the readers to hold the subject in contempt or disdain

I agree that we shouldn't indulge in libellous statements, points such as DR has made can be expressed effectively without using libellous language.

On the other hand, of course, the person being libelled has to demonstrate that the statements made really are libellous.  It's not enough simply to say that they are.

Ian your quite right ………however he carry’s on like he has on some of his recent posts and I will clearly demonstrate how effective law is

[drwindows]

What I'm saying is simply my opinion.  I am not intimidated by your pathetic threats.

Why dont you just answer the question:  How much do you claim from the government for every window cleaner who does one of your NVQs?

Its a simple enough question.  Lets see if you can answer it.

[Clive McDonald]

I'm not sure any of the legal comments are correct; this is cyberspace, and we are freely discoursing as forum members.

The mods ask us to be polite to guests because driving people with expetise away has happened before and we are the poorer for it.

What normaly happens in class, are their never any advese comments?

[Clive McDonald]

Ie.
there is an implied or impliciit acceptance that your opinion or what you state as fact can be challenged or ridiculed.The idea is that you fight your corner via debating skills.

[dai]

What I'm saying is simply my opinion.  I am not intimidated by your pathetic threats.

Why dont you just answer the question:  How much do you claim from the government for every window cleaner who does one of your NVQs?

Its a simple enough question.  Lets see if you can answer it.

If you really need an answer to that, do it under the freedom of information act, but does it matter how much the guy gets paid?
Am I missing something here? In reading this thread I see Willis responding to questions on safety issues, not pursuing a hidden agenda to drum up trade for his courses.

[Clive McDonald]

Oh crikey it's happened again!

We get the blame for this stuff as bullies but i didn't see anything defamatory?

What do the rest of you think? were we out of order or was he too sensitive?

[gewindows]

Oh bloomin 'eck Slumpy, what you done now?

Your always in the middle of it 

[Ian Lancaster]

What I'm saying is simply my opinion.  I am not intimidated by your pathetic threats.

Why dont you just answer the question:  How much do you claim from the government for every window cleaner who does one of your NVQs?

Its a simple enough question.  Lets see if you can answer it.

Normally I would feel embarrassed by someone demanding to know what another is charging for their services, as you would if another window cleaner demanded to know what you charge - it's none of their business and they have no right to know.  However in this instance it can't be denied that Willis has a financial interest in advocating training for as many people as possible, and it could be argued that this thread is being used as a vehicle to do just that.

In view of that I think DR has a valid point - Willis should at least acknowledge that his motive is not entirely altruistic - he may well passionately believe in the benefit of training as a means to reduce accidents, but at the same time he stands to gain by expressing that belief on this forum.

[Sunshine/Cleaning]

Well done lads. Yet another source of good info has deleted their accounts due to the hounding of pathetic children with nothing better to do.

Hope your proud of yourselves.

[Clive McDonald]

So give me just one example, one fact, one piece of good info that was given here?

On the other thread- accessing flat roofs- i admitt there was some info that was pertinent, but blimey the legal definiion of a competent person, where does that fit in?

[trevor perry]

i am sorry andy willis has deleted his account and although i disagree with much of what he says at least he was in a position to see what problems we face with the health and safety legislation as it stands and could pass this on at the meetings he attends, as for what he earns then that is his business and he is not a charity but offering a service and it is our decision whether we accept that service or not,i still look forward to speaking to you at windex andy.
  i dont think slumpy was wrong in asking the question in hope of an answer but may be andy should be a bit more thick skinned and not throw his dummy out as easy.

Trevor

[Clive McDonald]

I didn't ask that was someone else..... but don't worry i'm not litigous.

[wfp master]

i thought advertising on here wasnt allowed isnt that what he was doing 

[luther1]

Thought it was a very reasonable question myself.

[Ian Mason]

Mr Wallis clearly knows his stuff, but I don`t think he has done himself any favours by "speaking down" to people!

The trouble is, this attitude in itself can be off putting & intimidating to quieter people, who may have questions for him.

[bluez]

Had he prefaced his post with a comment like , "I am in the training game and not exactly unbiased on this but what are your opinions on ................

Then he would have been open and upfront.
 


  

[Ian_Giles]

[quote author drwindows link=topic=91213.msg814522#msg814522 date=1266886504]

competent is to have both practical experience and qualification

SO what you're saying is that by your convoluted definition to be competent we have to do a qualification, which AS LUCK WOULD HAVE IT you happen to provide.  Uncanny that is

Why dont you stop spamming this forum, and least tell us how much you claim from the government for each window cleaner you con into doing one of your pointless NVQs.  How much is it?  is it £500?

I read this reply by DRwindows this morning and thought it totally disrespectful, I imagine that Willis has deleted his account in disgust.
When someone is attacked in this manner, no matter what his replies might be, someone will pounce and gleefully pick it apart, for the likes of Willis (or some others who suffer the same fate) it is a lose-lose situation.
I personally didn't agree with all that Willis said but in no way do I believe he was on here trying to promote himself or to drum up applicants for his course(s) to make more money for himself.

His expertise and depth of knowledge with regards to health and safety (as laid down in official regulations and documentation) far exceeds our own on here.
Others may read and interpret the regulations differently, usually trying to find some imagined/perceived loophole they can use...ie, I've read many that claim that as cleaning a window is only short duration then it is fine and dandy to continue working off a ladder.
That may hold water if you are say, a builder and nip up a ladder to clean just a couple of windows on a single house, not so if you are a window cleaner climbing ladders several hours a day, 5 days a week, year in and year out.
Willis (or others of his ilk) will tell you how such interpretations will be viewed by those in authority.

No matter how we might  rail and chaff in angry frustration at the asinine doctrine thrown at us by qualified "experts" who have little or no practical experience (in the use of ladders where we are concerned, and I exclude Willis in this as he most plainly does have said experience) where the law is concerned, and where insurance claims are concerned and where apportioning blame in the event of accidents are concerned, it is those so called experts who will be listened to, and not us.

But yet again this forum has pushed away another expert in an area that is of no little importance to us all.

Ewan mentions that this kind of banter can happen to anyone, and not just suppliers or experts in this field or that, unfortunately it is this kind of behaviour that scares off many from posting through fear of being held to ridicule.
Ewan himself is often very forthright, on one reply of his I smiled to myself as he put forth his opinion of what a particular supplier might say, and to also say that whatever he said it would be basically a load of flannel  :

How can anyone defend themselves if their protagonists are determined to disbelieve them no matter what they might say? Even when they haven't said anything!!

AS a moderator by the way I am not attacking (or trying to moderate) either Drwindows or Ewan, its just my opinion as a forum member.

Ia

[Sunshine/Cleaning]

The problem is as Ian has outlined, it seems that only the hardened 'boneheads' stay on this forum (and I include myself in that number even though I have deleted my account several times) therefore it makes you wonder about the quality of the advice.