youreavinalaff

No, it isn't.

You might like to read my previous comment on the matter. The comment you quoted is wide of the mark.

Your post and you previous post suggesting " Brits leaving their parents in care homes", highlights your ignorance of who lives in care homes and for what reason.

Was one spelt "Runoldo"? ????????????

Not to mention the £74.99 people pay for a football shirt with their favourite player's name on the back.

I might be linking to the one you've already checked but bever mind. Here's where I'd go. http://www.buriramexpats.com/car-rental/

No. Only the person on the sponsorship forms can enter on a Tier2 visa. The others must apply for dependant visas. This is where the article is confusing. They talk about slave labour then about a woman who has proved enough funds to get a mum and 3 kids dependant visas. It doesn't add up. I would think the slave labour would be about those working with incorrect visas.

To have borrowed £300000 the borrowers would need an income of £75000, unless they thought it was all easy, interest rates would stay low forever and talked the lender into letting them borrow more than 4x salary. Stupid if so. A monthly salary, take home, on £75000 is circa £5000. So, new mortgage payments are less than 30% of income. In 1989, my girlfriend and I were paying over 15% interest and over 50% of our salary went on the mortgage. Nothing to see here.

Why?

I'm not interested in rejoining. Why would I ask?

There are different types of policy. I have a life assurance policy, not life insurance. It's about 1500 baht a month. My wife gets about one hundred thousand if I die. At 60 years old I can ask for closure and get some of the investment back. However, during the 20 years policy and upto 90 years old, if I choose not to close the account at 60, I get extensive medical cover. That includes a 1000 baht a day payment for lose of earnings if I stay in hospital.

I have a piece of string here. I'll ask my wife how long it is. I'd suggest the OP does the same with regards to the projected funeral costs. There's no common ground and many variables to consider.

If it's your funeral, you can make it anything. You're dead.

So, the estate belongs to the prople but Charles must pay inheritance tax. You can't have it both ways.

Sounds like you need some history lessons.

The amount was due to increase as it is worked out as a percentage of the income received by the treasury from the Crown Estate. Income has surged so the amount of sovereign grant was to increase. That was until it was agreed the %%% would reduce from 25% to 12%. Keeping the amount constant at around £86m. I've looked for an article from the Guardian explaining their error but can't find one. This is one that explains all. https://news.sky.com/story/sovereign-grant-changed-after-crown-estate-sees-profits-surge-12924156

The reasons for the electorate voting the Labout party into 5th in the third by election might.

It's a direct translation. นมเปรี้ยว It's drinking yogurt. Dutch Mill, Yakult. That sort of thing.

Thai driving licence. Copy front and back.

Lost in translation. That's all. Nothing to pick holes in. If you can't get used to it, read the Thai press.

You didn't see it. It was posted after your post. The article isn't even slightly misleading. Veterans can be of any occupational background. Even teachers.

Veteran : a person who has had long experience in a particular field.

You are obviously referring to a different case. So, that's two cases you failed to post about for balance. https://news.sky.com/story/labour-mp-says-opposition-frontbencher-still-in-post-despite-being-reported-to-police-for-alleged-sexual-assault-12895013

No. Because you used a specific case of one specific political party. For balance, you could have included the current and ongoing investigation into a Labour MP for sexual harrassment. You didn't and that speaks volumes

Correct. It's political. As can be seen by the post below.