Things that make you go What the F**k?

[seafoid]

 http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d452ff6a-9d95-11e4-9b22-00144feabdc0.html

"Back in 2009, a company called Gain Capital, parent of Forex.com, issued an IPO prospectus. This revealed that total customer trading volume was growing at a compound annual rate of nearly 90 per cent, hitting $1.5tn in 2008. Gain's profitability, meanwhile, was growing even faster: net income ballooned from $7m in 2004 to $230m in 2008. And this was just one of dozens of retail forex operators.
Regulators in the US realised what was going on. These businesses were offering their so-called clients huge leverage. Typically, to trade $1m of any currency pair, the individual speculator would have to put up a cash margin of just $5,000 — leverage of 200/1. Gain and the other operators were then taking the other side of the trade. These were not clients at all: they were counterparties.

What is more, because of the levels of leverage and the inherent volatility in currency prices, Gain's customers were just about guaranteed to lose.

The National Futures Association in the US took immediate action. Brokers had to demonstrate that they had sizeable capital buffers and, more importantly, a 50/1 leverage cap on trades was imposed.
The industry howled, arguing that in the face of such regulation the business would move abroad, probably to London. But the rules were imposed. And guess what? The industry did move to London.
Of those 4m retail forex traders cited by Citi, just 150,000 are thought to live in the US. The rest are spread across Europe and Asia, where regulators have simply failed to check the growth of an industry that employs a hardwired system to shake down clients.
Leverage levels of up to 500/1 are typically on offer to customers in London. In Cyprus leverage can rise to 1000/1.
Trading on such terms blows the client up very quickly, which is why all these forex operators employ lavish sums on marketing, targeting motor racing and Premier League football in particular. If the clients are always losing money you need to replenish them with fresh clients.
"

[tbrick18]

theres always one, or two

Saturday night there, I was at a hooley when a few people from work walked in including one of the managers, about an hour later I see him groping the breasts of one of the girls in full view of the rest of the staff, he was working on the outside of the clothes. I was rightly on and anyway I told him to stop, he feckin kept going and I walked out.
I am meeting him in an hour to talk to him about it, he has no idea this conversation is going to take place but that was my latest what the fcuk moment.

I am supposed to sack him on the spot, this girl reports to him and everybody seen me there at the time and they even have video of it on their cellphones. If I say nothing and it gets out I will be sacked as well, the hoor has put in me in a bad spot.

If he has so much as an inkling, I bet his stomach is in knots!
Jesus I wouldnt envy either of you, but you certainly dont let yourself get the sack for someone elses mistakes.


What the Fcuk...

I have the aul Irish mentally drilled into me and that is  to say nothing. The only reason I am contemplating saying anything is that the staff have the whole thing on video with me telling the stupid fcuker to quit it. I dont know if I can take a chance and say nothing but if I dont he loses his livelyhood. I also have an obligation to my family and I am completely torn. Feck his stomach being in knots, mine are as well and I never get nervous about anything except Armagh matches. 

You need to get her involved as well and see what she thought of the whole situation. Document everything and report to your superior as he/she needs to be involved also. You need to follow your company guideline on sexual harassment if they have one if they don't they need one. If you do not handle it correctly you will lose all respect from the other other employees. Tough situation.

Just what I was about to say. You never know, maybe she was complicit? Assuming it was an unwanted bit of groping, you need to pull them both in separately. If I was you, I'd speak to the girl first to get her perspective then speak to the guy involved. You'd have a better idea of what her intentions are and it might help you decide how far you need to go with him.
I don't envy you your position though.

When I did my placement at university there was this guy (a nice enough lad from Armagh) who absolutely stank of BO. A big lad, sitting in an office environment who reeks did not go down too well with the ladies sitting nearby. A few complained and the manager had to take him aside and tell him he stank (she might have been a bit more tactful though). She was so embarrassed to have to do it, the guy probably was too. But to be fair, he sorted himself out. It's not in the same ballpark, but shows that sometimes a quiet word can be enough to resolve a difficult situation.

[macdanger2]

Jaysus brick, he could have done with that advice about 7 years ago 

[AZOffaly]

Is this the first post where the US Statute of Limitations could be invoked?

[brokencrossbar1]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-30876360

A five-year-old was billed for failing to attend a friend's birthday party - resulting in threats of legal action.

Alex Nash, from Cornwall, was invited to the party just before Christmas.

An invoice for £15.95 was sent by his schoolfriend's mother Julie Lawrence, who said Alex's non-attendance left her out of pocket and his parents had her details to tell her he was not going.

Alex's father Derek said he had been told he would be taken to the small claims court for refusing to pay.

Alex's parents, from Torpoint, had accepted an invitation to the party at a dry ski slope in Plymouth, Devon, just before Christmas.

However, they realised their son was double-booked and due to spend time with his grandparents, which he did.


Analysis: Clive Coleman, BBC legal correspondent
It is all but impossible that Ms Lawrence will be able to recover the £15.95 party "no show fee".

Any claim would be on the basis that a contract had been created, which included a term that a "no show" fee would be charged.

However, for there to be a contract, there needs to be an intention to create legal relations. A child's party invitation would not create legal relations with either the child "guest" or its parents.

If it is being argued that the contract is with the child, it is inconceivable that a five-year-old would be seen by a court as capable of creating legal relations and entering into a contract with a "no show" charge.

It's amusing to imagine what a children's party invitation seeking to create a contract might say: "I, the 'first party', hereinafter referred to as the 'birthday boy', cordially invite you the 'second party', hereinafter referred to as 'my best friend', to the party of 'the first party'.


His parents said they had no contact information for Ms Lawrence at that time.

They found the invoice in a brown envelope in his schoolbag last week.

Mr Nash said: "It was a proper invoice with full official details and even her bank details on it.

"I can understand that she's upset about losing money. The money isn't the issue, it's the way she went about trying to get the money from me.

The invoice lists a "Party No Show" fee
"She didn't treat me like a human being, she treated me like a child and that I should do what she says."

In a short statement, Ms Lawrence said: "All details were on the party invite. They had every detail needed to contact me."

Mr Nash said he had been told he was being taken to the small claims court because he was refusing to pay.

The party was held at the Plymouth Ski and Snowboard Centre.

In a statement, the centre said: "We would like all our customers to know that this invoice has nothing to do with Plymouth Ski and Snowboard Centre.

"No invoices are ever sent out from the centre to private individuals. This is a disagreement between the two parents involved and the fact that the centre has been named on the invoice is fraudulent.

"When booking a party there is a small deposit to pay on booking, confirmation of numbers and final balance are due 48 hours before the party.

"On the extremely rare occasion that people don't attend parents are generally offered other activities in compensation."



Like really wtf!!!!

[muppet]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-30876360

A five-year-old was billed for failing to attend a friend's birthday party - resulting in threats of legal action.

Alex Nash, from Cornwall, was invited to the party just before Christmas.

An invoice for £15.95 was sent by his schoolfriend's mother Julie Lawrence, who said Alex's non-attendance left her out of pocket and his parents had her details to tell her he was not going.

Alex's father Derek said he had been told he would be taken to the small claims court for refusing to pay.

Alex's parents, from Torpoint, had accepted an invitation to the party at a dry ski slope in Plymouth, Devon, just before Christmas.

However, they realised their son was double-booked and due to spend time with his grandparents, which he did.


Analysis: Clive Coleman, BBC legal correspondent
It is all but impossible that Ms Lawrence will be able to recover the £15.95 party "no show fee".

Any claim would be on the basis that a contract had been created, which included a term that a "no show" fee would be charged.

However, for there to be a contract, there needs to be an intention to create legal relations. A child's party invitation would not create legal relations with either the child "guest" or its parents.

If it is being argued that the contract is with the child, it is inconceivable that a five-year-old would be seen by a court as capable of creating legal relations and entering into a contract with a "no show" charge.

It's amusing to imagine what a children's party invitation seeking to create a contract might say: "I, the 'first party', hereinafter referred to as the 'birthday boy', cordially invite you the 'second party', hereinafter referred to as 'my best friend', to the party of 'the first party'.


His parents said they had no contact information for Ms Lawrence at that time.

They found the invoice in a brown envelope in his schoolbag last week.

Mr Nash said: "It was a proper invoice with full official details and even her bank details on it.

"I can understand that she's upset about losing money. The money isn't the issue, it's the way she went about trying to get the money from me.

The invoice lists a "Party No Show" fee
"She didn't treat me like a human being, she treated me like a child and that I should do what she says."

In a short statement, Ms Lawrence said: "All details were on the party invite. They had every detail needed to contact me."

Mr Nash said he had been told he was being taken to the small claims court because he was refusing to pay.

The party was held at the Plymouth Ski and Snowboard Centre.

In a statement, the centre said: "We would like all our customers to know that this invoice has nothing to do with Plymouth Ski and Snowboard Centre.

"No invoices are ever sent out from the centre to private individuals. This is a disagreement between the two parents involved and the fact that the centre has been named on the invoice is fraudulent.

"When booking a party there is a small deposit to pay on booking, confirmation of numbers and final balance are due 48 hours before the party.

"On the extremely rare occasion that people don't attend parents are generally offered other activities in compensation."



Like really wtf!!!!

They will wonder why no one comes to their child's party next year. I wonder can they sue for that?

[seafoid]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-30876360

A five-year-old was billed for failing to attend a friend's birthday party - resulting in threats of legal action.

Alex Nash, from Cornwall, was invited to the party just before Christmas.

An invoice for £15.95 was sent by his schoolfriend's mother Julie Lawrence, who said Alex's non-attendance left her out of pocket and his parents had her details to tell her he was not going.

Alex's father Derek said he had been told he would be taken to the small claims court for refusing to pay.

Alex's parents, from Torpoint, had accepted an invitation to the party at a dry ski slope in Plymouth, Devon, just before Christmas.

However, they realised their son was double-booked and due to spend time with his grandparents, which he did.


Analysis: Clive Coleman, BBC legal correspondent
It is all but impossible that Ms Lawrence will be able to recover the £15.95 party "no show fee".

Any claim would be on the basis that a contract had been created, which included a term that a "no show" fee would be charged.

However, for there to be a contract, there needs to be an intention to create legal relations. A child's party invitation would not create legal relations with either the child "guest" or its parents.

If it is being argued that the contract is with the child, it is inconceivable that a five-year-old would be seen by a court as capable of creating legal relations and entering into a contract with a "no show" charge.

It's amusing to imagine what a children's party invitation seeking to create a contract might say: "I, the 'first party', hereinafter referred to as the 'birthday boy', cordially invite you the 'second party', hereinafter referred to as 'my best friend', to the party of 'the first party'.


His parents said they had no contact information for Ms Lawrence at that time.

They found the invoice in a brown envelope in his schoolbag last week.

Mr Nash said: "It was a proper invoice with full official details and even her bank details on it.

"I can understand that she's upset about losing money. The money isn't the issue, it's the way she went about trying to get the money from me.

The invoice lists a "Party No Show" fee
"She didn't treat me like a human being, she treated me like a child and that I should do what she says."

In a short statement, Ms Lawrence said: "All details were on the party invite. They had every detail needed to contact me."

Mr Nash said he had been told he was being taken to the small claims court because he was refusing to pay.

The party was held at the Plymouth Ski and Snowboard Centre.

In a statement, the centre said: "We would like all our customers to know that this invoice has nothing to do with Plymouth Ski and Snowboard Centre.

"No invoices are ever sent out from the centre to private individuals. This is a disagreement between the two parents involved and the fact that the centre has been named on the invoice is fraudulent.

"When booking a party there is a small deposit to pay on booking, confirmation of numbers and final balance are due 48 hours before the party.

"On the extremely rare occasion that people don't attend parents are generally offered other activities in compensation."



Like really wtf!!!!

They will wonder why no one comes to their child's party next year. I wonder can they sue for that?

The mother is nuts. Or else was very tired and emotional.

[Orior]

I feel sorry for the mother's kid. Unless he grows up to be like her, which isn't out of the question.

Has the mother offered any more of an explanation?

[brokencrossbar1]

Is this the first post where the US Statute of Limitations could be invoked?

I actually think Stew has retired from that job since then!!!

[deiseach]

Hardy has just turned into an eagle to fly to Pussytown to congratulate 'George Washington' on the correct usage of Jack Daniel's.

[seafoid]

http://uk.businessinsider.com/dimon-says-jpmorgan-is-his-contribution-2015-1?r=US

JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon said that leading JPMorgan is the "best thing" he can do for his country and humanity in an interview with Fox Business Network's Maria Bartiromo.

What the fox

[haveaharp]

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/unholy-row-as-larne-plans-plaque-to-mark-1711-witch-trial-30965295.html

[illdecide]

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/unholy-row-as-larne-plans-plaque-to-mark-1711-witch-trial-30965295.html

I'd say there a still quite a few Witches about Larne to this very day...Bitter wans at that

[Windmill abu]

There are scumbags and then there are SCUMBAGS

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-31173113

[brokencrossbar1]

http://theliberal.ie/teenager-murders-friend-then-takes-selfie-with-the-corpse/

Another disturbing story unfolds today as sixteen year old American student Ryan Mangan was shot dead by friend and fellow classmate Maxwell Morton also sixteen,  in the city of Jeannette, Pennsylvania, last Wednesday.

The shooter, Ryan Mangan was a classmate of Mr.Morton before going to Morton's family home and shooting him once in the face killing the teenager instantly.

Mr. Mangan then allegedly took a selfie with the dead body of his friend before sending the picture to his snapchat contacts. Snapchat is an app which allows users to send pictures to each other for a set amount of seconds and cannot be regained unless the photograph is saved.

In this case, the photograph Morton sent was saved by a contact of Morton's and the mother of the boy contacted the police immediately.

It's a first for county District Attorney John Peck, who has said "I've never seen it before, but it was a key piece of evidence that led investigators to the defendant."

Morton was arrested today and confessed to killing Mangan after police searched his home and found a 9mm handgun hidden under the basement steps, according to the Tribune. Morton has been charged with first-degree murder, homicide and possession of a firearm by a minor.

The victim's funeral is due to be held today, while a preliminary court hearing for the defendant is due to take place on February 19