Proof that Letting Agents are evil fiends

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Proof that Letting Agents are evil fiends

    If we assign numerical values (A = 1 and Z = 26) to “A letting agent - servants of Beelzebub” we arrive at a figure of 333. Once you have two agents you get 666 which is the Sign of the Beast. Need I say more?

    #2
    Originally posted by Lawcruncher View Post
    If we assign numerical values (A = 1 and Z = 26) to “A letting agent - servants of Beelzebub” we arrive at a figure of 333. Once you have two agents you get 666 which is the Sign of the Beast. Need I say more?
    I think it is prophetic and needs no amplification.
    'Pause you who read this, and think for a moment of the long chain of iron or gold, of thorns or flowers, that would never have bound you, but for the formation fo the first link on one memorable day'. Charles Dickens, Great Expectations

    Comment


      #3
      Phew, what a relief. I though at first glance that the thread suggested Letting Agents to be our friends...
      JEFFREY SHAW, solicitor [and Topic Expert], Nether Edge Law*
      1. Public advice is believed accurate, but I accept no legal responsibility except to direct-paying private clients.
      2. Telephone advice: see http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=34638.
      3. For paid advice about conveyancing/leaseholds/L&T, contact me* and become a private client.
      4. *- Contact info: click on my name (blue-highlight link).

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by jeffrey View Post
        Phew, what a relief. I though at first glance that the thread suggested Letting Agents to be our friends...
        sits in a corner sucking her thumb.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Springfields View Post
          sits in a corner sucking her thumb.
          Don't worry. I'm sure Lawcruncher didn't mean nice, kind, helpful letting agents like you, just big, greedy sharky ones. You are however something of an endangered species.
          'Pause you who read this, and think for a moment of the long chain of iron or gold, of thorns or flowers, that would never have bound you, but for the formation fo the first link on one memorable day'. Charles Dickens, Great Expectations

          Comment


            #6
            Darwin would have us believe that species evolve; right or wrong, he'd never met a Letting agent.
            JEFFREY SHAW, solicitor [and Topic Expert], Nether Edge Law*
            1. Public advice is believed accurate, but I accept no legal responsibility except to direct-paying private clients.
            2. Telephone advice: see http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=34638.
            3. For paid advice about conveyancing/leaseholds/L&T, contact me* and become a private client.
            4. *- Contact info: click on my name (blue-highlight link).

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by jeffrey View Post
              Darwin would have us believe that species evolve; right or wrong, he'd never met a Letting agent.
              He was right. Evolution is a fact and not a theory. The theories are only concerned with the mechanism of evolution.

              Comment


                #8
                Evolution is a fact only so far as concerns survival of the fittest and adaptation to environment- not re anything changing species.
                JEFFREY SHAW, solicitor [and Topic Expert], Nether Edge Law*
                1. Public advice is believed accurate, but I accept no legal responsibility except to direct-paying private clients.
                2. Telephone advice: see http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=34638.
                3. For paid advice about conveyancing/leaseholds/L&T, contact me* and become a private client.
                4. *- Contact info: click on my name (blue-highlight link).

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by jeffrey View Post
                  Evolution is a fact only so far as concerns survival of the fittest and adaptation to environment- not re anything changing species.
                  Well I have known people who have been born without:
                  a) an appendix
                  b) a coccyx

                  Therefore humans are a changing species, physically. But if Darwin believes we have all evolved from apes, why are there still apes around even today?
                  Plus, why are some men not hairy? And I'm not referring to those men who can afford the
                  wax, back, sack and crack treatment, or should I say endure that treatment.
                  To know how rich you are, count the things you have which money can't buy.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by wilfred View Post
                    But if Darwin believes we have all evolved from apes, why are there still apes around even today?
                    Because both humans and the apes around today descend from a common ancestor.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Lawcruncher: You might believe yourself descended in the same way as apes, from a common ancestor; kindly don't include the rest of us.
                      JEFFREY SHAW, solicitor [and Topic Expert], Nether Edge Law*
                      1. Public advice is believed accurate, but I accept no legal responsibility except to direct-paying private clients.
                      2. Telephone advice: see http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=34638.
                      3. For paid advice about conveyancing/leaseholds/L&T, contact me* and become a private client.
                      4. *- Contact info: click on my name (blue-highlight link).

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by wilfred View Post
                        Well I have known people who have been born without:
                        a) an appendix
                        b) a coccyx.
                        Therefore humans are a changing species, physically..
                        The fact that individuals are born with (or without) certain features (when most/all the rest of the population is different), means only that there has been a genetic mutation in their case. It is when whole populations acquire or lose features, (or more often, when features change e.g. become larger or smaller or vestigial, over thousands of years), that we can say they are evolving.
                        Originally posted by wilfred View Post
                        Plus, why are some men not hairy?
                        It may have been an adaptation to environment at some point in those men's ancestry, but there is in any case a range of genetically determined difference even within one species, e.g. eye colour, hair colour, height, sexuality, skin colour, and so on.
                        'Pause you who read this, and think for a moment of the long chain of iron or gold, of thorns or flowers, that would never have bound you, but for the formation fo the first link on one memorable day'. Charles Dickens, Great Expectations

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by jeffrey View Post
                          Lawcruncher: You might believe yourself descended in the same way as apes, from a common ancestor; kindly don't include the rest of us.
                          Please dont include me in your exclusion.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by Roy_Solomon View Post
                            Please dont include me in your exclusion.
                            Nor me! And in any case, if Lawcruncher (along with most people who have considered the issue seriously), chooses to believe that all humans - including jeffrey - are descended from apes, then who is jeffrey to instruct him not to believe it? It is in any case more logical to believe either that all humans are, or are not (descended from other primates), than to believe that some are and some are not!
                            'Pause you who read this, and think for a moment of the long chain of iron or gold, of thorns or flowers, that would never have bound you, but for the formation fo the first link on one memorable day'. Charles Dickens, Great Expectations

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Er, I didn't say that he was not to believe it. As so often, you're putting words in my mouth; don't.
                              JEFFREY SHAW, solicitor [and Topic Expert], Nether Edge Law*
                              1. Public advice is believed accurate, but I accept no legal responsibility except to direct-paying private clients.
                              2. Telephone advice: see http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=34638.
                              3. For paid advice about conveyancing/leaseholds/L&T, contact me* and become a private client.
                              4. *- Contact info: click on my name (blue-highlight link).

                              Comment

                              Latest Activity

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X