Suddenly I understand!
Back when Thomas first started talking to his family about my family his mother had seemed somewhat astounded that my brother had decided to become a criminal lawyer. Incredulous that anyone could go to the bother of studying long and hard to go into a profession that didn't pay well, she wondered why he hadn't opted for boring old tax or insurance law like her own high-earning sister. When Thomas explained that criminal defence pays well in the UK she didn't understand how it could given that criminals of this type, by definition, can't afford to pay lawyers hundreds of pounds an hour and people who could afford such bills didn't tend to go about mugging people or burgling their houses.
This morning Radio 2's news headline was the Sun's newspaper's condemnation of the Labour party. Not a Sun-reader, I clicked on it out of curiosity and got their slide show of Labour failures. Screen 2 explained immediately why criminal lawyers in general were not earning the pitiful salaries my mother-in-law expected. I must look into how these other countries' legal systems manage to work on such a tight shoestring...
Showing posts with label law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label law. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Saturday, October 20, 2007
WHAT'S IN A NAME?
Interesting how certain laws are woolly in this country. When I decided to revert to my maiden name a month ago, I was told that legally a married woman who took her husband's name can revert to her maiden name at any time and doesn't need to wait until a divorce is granted. Given how hard it is to get a divorce in this country, I wanted to change name now so baby Bart-Lisa could be a Buchanan-Widmann, rather than a, perhaps inappropriate Gautier-Widmann. After reading up on the pitfalls of name change, I reluctantly decided that paying £70 to change by deed poll was safer than just reverting. My lawyer thought I was mad to pay but guess what, it seems I am right! Although I have a legal right to call myself Buchanan, there seems to be a problem with financial institutions in the UK not accepting that right. When I wrote to my bank to have my name changed on my current account this week, I was informed that they would only change my name on my cards after seeing either my divorce papers or my deed poll documentation. I feel this anomaly is very unfair. Grrr!
Monday, September 18, 2006
A WAVE OF TANTRUMS
Today a new car seat law comes into force in the UK. Which is interesting since no one probably really knew what the old car seat law was, if there was one?
Firstly I see the point, yes child safety is paramount. However, I can already hear the cacophony of tantrums this morning around the UK as most kids who stopped sitting in a babyseat, as they will perceive it, around the age of 6 or 7, ie in their 2nd year at primary school are wedged back into one to go to their primary 6 or 7, or even for the most unfortunate among them, their first year at highschool class this morning! (Yes, I think 12 is a bit over the top!) I am lucky in so much as Charlotte still uses hers so no tantrum there and Marcel is 9 but 1m39, phew because he had informed me he would quite literally rather die than use one! But as one of the tallest in his class, I guess he'll be comforting a good few friends this morning.
The problem I see it is the lack of consistency across Europe. I often drive in both France and Germany, often on the same day hopping backwards and forwards across the border. I rang ahead to Avis in Hahn last time and asked which seats I'd need to fly over with me - the guy said one for Léon, one for Charlotte but Marcel could sit in the car. Believe me when you are flying alone with 3 kids and luggage, you want to fly over as few carseats as you can get away with! At the desk when I arrived they were unsure whether Marcel needed a seat or not so I drove off with 2 on seats, one not. At the French border again there were no signs, no instructions, but my sister-in-law (a childless 50-something - so who knows if she is right or not!) seemed to be under the impression they should all have one and that Marcel wasn't allowed to sit in the front till he was 12. In the UK you can sit in the front from 3 on a booster, from 12 or 135cm without and you can go in the front in a newborn <9kg carrier.
Can't they just publish a list of rules somewhere which are the same in all EU countries to stop us poor unwitting parents who drive around not knowing what the law is or who to ask to get the right answer?
An aside: I actually remember hiring a car in Barcelona when Charlotte was a baby (before I realized you were charged more than a seat cost to hire one for a week) so I asked to hire a car and a babyseat - Here's the car they said - the babyseats are in that hut over there - you can have one if there are any in stock! ...and if there aren't? I guess my 1 year old can rattle up and down the back seat all the way from Barcelona to Perpignan, where I was driving, I guess!
Firstly I see the point, yes child safety is paramount. However, I can already hear the cacophony of tantrums this morning around the UK as most kids who stopped sitting in a babyseat, as they will perceive it, around the age of 6 or 7, ie in their 2nd year at primary school are wedged back into one to go to their primary 6 or 7, or even for the most unfortunate among them, their first year at highschool class this morning! (Yes, I think 12 is a bit over the top!) I am lucky in so much as Charlotte still uses hers so no tantrum there and Marcel is 9 but 1m39, phew because he had informed me he would quite literally rather die than use one! But as one of the tallest in his class, I guess he'll be comforting a good few friends this morning.
The problem I see it is the lack of consistency across Europe. I often drive in both France and Germany, often on the same day hopping backwards and forwards across the border. I rang ahead to Avis in Hahn last time and asked which seats I'd need to fly over with me - the guy said one for Léon, one for Charlotte but Marcel could sit in the car. Believe me when you are flying alone with 3 kids and luggage, you want to fly over as few carseats as you can get away with! At the desk when I arrived they were unsure whether Marcel needed a seat or not so I drove off with 2 on seats, one not. At the French border again there were no signs, no instructions, but my sister-in-law (a childless 50-something - so who knows if she is right or not!) seemed to be under the impression they should all have one and that Marcel wasn't allowed to sit in the front till he was 12. In the UK you can sit in the front from 3 on a booster, from 12 or 135cm without and you can go in the front in a newborn <9kg carrier.
Can't they just publish a list of rules somewhere which are the same in all EU countries to stop us poor unwitting parents who drive around not knowing what the law is or who to ask to get the right answer?
An aside: I actually remember hiring a car in Barcelona when Charlotte was a baby (before I realized you were charged more than a seat cost to hire one for a week) so I asked to hire a car and a babyseat - Here's the car they said - the babyseats are in that hut over there - you can have one if there are any in stock! ...and if there aren't? I guess my 1 year old can rattle up and down the back seat all the way from Barcelona to Perpignan, where I was driving, I guess!
Monday, September 11, 2006
WE LIVE IN A CRAZY WORLD
I was listening to PM on Radio 4 while cooking this evening. One news article caught my attention. I listened in disbelief - it was bad enough the crazy banned passenger thought it better to have a blind man drive than to break his own driving ban himself but the bit that amazed me most, not mentioned in the written article, was part of the punishment. Apparently he has been ordered to sit a driving test!!!! (I'll give you a minute to digest that and possibly reread in disbelief!) When asked if this was a wise punishment, the judge said his hands were tied - it was in the rules that the punishment for this type of driving offence (he was charged with driving with no insurance, licence or MOT) had to include making the offender sit a driving test. Surely in cases like this, when the offender has no eyes, the rules should sensibly be bent a little, no???
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)