And even if you take such things with your employer's consent, or make phone calls from work, you are guilty of tax evasion unless you declare it on your tax return (whether or not your employer puts it on your P11D).
If you think breach of copyright is of no consequence or not actionable, you need your head examined.
Yes but isn't it something people do without thinking about it? Photocopy a map or record a film without it ever crossing their mind that they are committing an offence?
In my example they are *told* "You will be committing an offence" but no matter how law-abiding they may believe themselves to be they muse for 5 seconds and merrily say:
"Doesn't matter, I'll take the risk!"
They then have to fit the plates themeselves because nobody will help them in such a blatantly illegal act.
Is it an offence to *drink* out of hours? Or is the offence serving intoxicating liquors out of hours?
Either way that is a good one but you must live in the countryside, there's not much out-of-hours drinking in Surbiton that I know of.
I wasn't specifically thinking of lock-ins or serving after hours, which although could be widespread would not involve millions of people. I was referring to anyone who had a drink in front of them one second after drinking up time, which technically would be a criminal offence. This DOES occur every single day in every single pub, and certainly every one that I've ever been in.
There would have been even more offenders when drinking up time was only 10 minutes.
Data Protection Act by Local Authorities 40 day time limit always exceeded Custom & Excise Duty on Tobacco Mot on vehicle
A few that are always sidestepped in many cases
AO
That used to be the case until about three years ago, when after many complaints about EU interference, the governmnet relented and allowed St. George's crosses, the Saltire and presumably the Welsh dragon.
Rgds
__ Richard Buttrey Grappenhall, Cheshire, UK __________________________
Did you do your hours archery practice last Sunday?
gutted
gdgd! :)
One can drink alcoholic drinks from the age of five, so I doubt that many do break that law.
Don't agree -- many people who do this would not be Ghosh dishonest.
I take lots of pens etc home from the office, but then they are mine so that's OK.
Francis Davey
Do you tell the taxman of this perk?
Me.
Probably a lot more than you would think haven't. It is only illegal in licensed premises, or public places.
You may price it 99p, but you may not then say that the unit price is
99p per 100g. You must say 99.0p per 100g.
"SteveR" wrote
Eh? Why even for that?
The quote above says "... it shall be expressed to the nearest 0.1p". - "99p" *is* 'to the nearest 0.1p' (for as long as 99.0p is).
Its not a perk, they belong to me, so I don't have to tell the taxman about it. Unless there is some very peculiar tax rule that I have never heard of.
As to things that don't belong to me (such as consumables) I'm really unsure what their status is.
Francis Davey
In message , Tim writes
There's a difference in precision. 99p is only expressed to the nearest penny and the requirement is to express the unit price more precisely to the nearest 0.1p.
No, 99p is not *expressed* to the nearest 0.1p. Any amount from (by their rounding rules) 98.5p to 98.499999...p would be expressed as 99p. To *express* 99p to the nearest 0.1p, you have to show how many 0.1p's there are, i.e. 0, whence 99.0p. But the regulation only applies to the
*unit* price, not to the item price.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^ D'oh. Should be 99.499999...p on the line above.
Of course it is. Think about it ... the amount 99p is the *same* as the amount 99.0p - and both are the same as the amount 99.0000p etc etc. When you are *separately* saying that the accuracy of the number is "to the nearest 0.1p", then you don't *also* have to show any trailing zeroes.
"SteveR" wrote
Absolutely not! - Not when you are showing it **to the nearest 0.1p**.
If you say "to the nearest 0.1p, the price is 99p per unit" then the price
*must* be between 98.95p and 99.04999999p. If it were instead 98.7p (say), then you could *not* say "to the nearest 0.1p it is 99p" !!"SteveR" wrote
The *absence* of any digit in that decimal place shows that the number of
0.1p's is *zero*. The fact that the amount is being shown "to the nearest 0.1p" precludes any possibility that the number is between 98.5p & 98.94999999 or between 99.05p and 99.4999999p.BeanSmart website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.