Six inches of snow outside and, brrrr, it’s bloody cold. For most of us that means staying indoors all week, working from home if possible, and turning the heating up another degree. But for a few households, that extra 1 degree can significantly increase your gas/electricity bill – which in the current (financial) climate, adds a strain to already thin wages.

An uninsulated house loses 33% of all heat generated through your walls, 25% through the roof and (if not double glazed or poorly fitted) 20% through the windows. Fortunately, there is something you can do about that – and it might not cost you a penny*

Although it’s quite hidden on the Salford Council website, there is help for some households which means you can get cavity wall and loft insulation free of charge.

*If you live anywhere in Salford, it does not matter if you are a homeowner or renting from either a private landlord or Salix Homes/City West – if you are over 70 years of age OR earning less than £15,592 and receiving a benefit (perhaps Working Tax Credit or Child Tax Credit) you WILL qualify for FREE CAVITY WALL and LOFT INSULATION.

Simply telephone Salford Council’s Affordable Warmth Team on 0161-922 8732 or email: keepingwarm@salford.gov.uk
There is also an on-line form you can fill in to submit your request for FREE INSULATION here at: http://www.salford.gov.uk/lowcostinsulation.htm

In April 2007, Salford Council conducted an aerial thermal image scan of every household in Salford, you can check your own home’s results here: http://www.salford.gov.uk/aerial-thermal-images.htm

Type in your postcode and the Council’s database will automatically check the level of heat loss from your home (levels correct as at 5th April 2007).

Don’t forget, the governments boiler scrappage scheme also started today – but you’re unlikely to benefit unless your boiler is 15 years old, or older. If you still have a G-rated boiler (pilot light permanently lit), then you could get £400 off the cost of a new one.

Late last night (about 1am), I was made aware of a completely ridiculous and baseless accusation from Richard Carvath that I and/or Norman Owen have been involved in a blog-comment discussion over on the Swinton South Liberal Democrat site.

Apparently this claim has been made to Richard Carvath by an “anonymous electronic communication”.

I would like to state here, for the public record, I am not the mysterious Roger Berry. I do not write anything using the name Roger Berry nor do I know who Roger Berry is. He may or may not be a real person, it may be a pseudo-name; I do not know.

To Richard Carvath: I would expect more for someone who wishes to represent Salford in Parliament, fortunately with this display of childish and potentially illegal behaviour it’s increasingly unlikely to happen. Salford can breathe a sigh of relief that such a naive, irrational and comical character will not be a source of embarrassment.

I require a complete retraction on your own website (deleting the offending blog article will suffice). And on the Swinton South Liberal Democrat blog I require nothing less than a full ap0logy for accusing me of writing under the name of Roger Berry. Further, I demand to know who the “anonymous electronic communication” is from – I understand that Richard may not wish to make this individual’s identity public but I have a right to face my accuser(s), if indeed there are any other than Richard himself.

Clearly Richard’s posting on his own website and comment replies on the Swinton South Liberal Democrat blog were designed to harm Councillor Norman Owen’s public perception and my own. The accusations are baseless, defamatory and potentially libelous. If the accusations are not withdrawn in full, I will take legal advice and dependent upon that advice may issue proceedings against Mr Carvath.

It is simply not good enough to repeat groundless accusations and then state “I was only repeating what I had been told” – if you publish it on your own website, you are responsible for the content, regardless of the source.

I hereby give Richard Carvath 48 hours to delete the offending item from his website and publish an immediate retraction on the Swinton South Liberal Democrat website.

Finally, I suggest a suitable mark of regret would be a donation of £15 to Christie’s Hospital.

For some reason I’ve been hit by hundreds of comment spam this evening, so apologies if you post comments and they don’t come through straight away – I’ll work on fixing it all tomorrow.

Off to bed now.

This was supposed to be a humorous blog post about the fact that Twitter is currently offline and I was wondering how it will be possible for all those iPhone and Blackberry users to tell their followers what they are doing in 140 characters or less.

It was then that I was reminded that Twitter is currently being used in Iran to document the ongoing situation following their Presidential Election.

With heavy reporting restrictions in place and because of the rules banning unauthorised gatherings, Twitter is playing an important role in Iran, encouraging open discussion and enabling the process of arranging political meetings.

All of this, is of course, banned in Iran.

So next time you read a Tweet about something trivial, remember that hundreds or maybe thousands of miles away, Twitter could be saving a life or bringing about political change.

Who would have thought that a free social networking website could change the world?

I’m not sure what is more surprising about this video, the fact that Susan Boyle’s voice is just amazing, or that I was informed about this by my favourite American author (Peter David). I’ve heard that even Demi Moore and Ashton Kutcher are big fans. And no, I don’t watch Britain’s Got Talent (do they broadcast it in the US?)

Back in January, I wrote about a bar in Oldham that had introduced a new promotion, All you can drink, £5.99
I condemned this promotion at the time and am glad to see that the Liberal Democrat controlled Oldham Council has decided to review the licences of all the pubs and bars in and around Yorkshire Street, which is where the majority of the town’s bars are located. 

This strong action has been taken by Oldham Council’s Trading Standards under the Licensing Act 2003, which will see all 22 bars have their licences reviewed following a spate of incidents involving town centre disorder.

Trading Standards suggestion includes introducing post office-style queuing systems and the limit of two drinks per person, in the hopes that promotions run by bars do not promote alcohol mis-use and anti-social behaviour.

You can read the full story here, on BBC New’s website.

I praise the Liberal Democrat-controlled Oldham Council and will be watching the results of the licence review, to see if it is something we could introduce here in Salford.

I recently had cause to write to my local MP, Hazel Blears, with reference to the shocking decision by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme to deny Christies Hospital a refund of £6.5m of donated money that was lost when two Icelandic banks collapsed.

Whilst I did expect a standard reply, penned by one of Ms. Blears’ minions – I did not expect to open the reply and see her picture greeting me whilst I tried to down my ready brek this morning.

Is Hazel Blears really so vain she needs to include a photograph of herself on all official correspondence from her parliamentary office?

It was the last thing I needed to see this morning whilst I tried to digest my breakfast!

In an effort to forget the woes of the recent by-election in Pendlebury, I elected (no pun intended!) to take the other half for a meal and film at our local cinema. Regrettably, I selected ‘Watchmen’ despite the wife warning me the feature had not received particularly good reviews. I generally do read cinema reviews before choosing which film to go and see, but I recall having seen a trailer for Watchmen at a previous cinema outing. The trailer seemed to offer something different – a dark tale, where superheroes are a little less ’super’ and rather more ‘damaged.’

For the uninitiated, Watchmen is based on a 1980s comic book, set in an alternate 1985 reality where masked/costumed vigilantes fight crime in America and President Nixon has served three terms as President. I would attempt to summarise the plot, but there is no plot. At just over 2 and three quarter hours Director Zack Snyder (of ‘300′ fame) attempted to copy the style of the excellent ‘Sin City’ with more than a small nod towards ‘The Dark Night’ and even a complete rip-off of an entire scene from ‘Dr Strangelove’.

The film begins with the murder of one of the vigilante superheroes (The Comedian) but there is no reason for the viewer to invest in the superhero characters, as they have no redeeming features whatsoever; further, the characters are simply boring. At one point, which may have been after I had re-opened my eyes after a short rest, I was actually hoping more superheroes would be killed – but then I realised I didn’t care either way.

We are then offered some kind of ridiculous love triangle; but since there is no reason to care about any of the characters involved, the whole love-triangle-arc is meaningless and ultimately futile. After a couple of awkward sex scenes, which offer little to the viewer (did the writer just use a free downloadable template to write the screenplay? You can just imagine where the template had the words “INSERT GENERIC SEX SCENE HERE”)

Finally, after many extended scenes of ‘Dr Manhatten’ parading around naked (yes, the full frontal kind), I re-opened my eyes for the second time to witness the conclusion to this awful movie. Despite my sincere hope  that the USSR would get the chance to obliterate the alternate-reality east coast USA, I was not rewarded by my 3 hour wait.

While I was not expecting a thought provoking and deeply engaging experience from ‘Watchmen’, I was hoping for a touch of escapism and perhaps even a captivating storyline. In fact, I would have settled for a a superficially visual spectacle, that would have at least allowed me to forget my aching bones for a couple of hours.

Who watch the Watchmen? Only those that haven’t had time to catch a review – everyone else: AVOID!

For the second time this week I’ve woken up feeling ever so slightly queasy – probably something I ate. So it was appropriate that I would read, whilst browsing The Times Online, a letter written to the editor.

Sir, “Quantitative easing” is far too cumbersome a phrase. I suggest that we truncate the phrase into a more manageable term: “Queasing”. Much easier to pronounce and carries with it the slightly queasy feeling that one naturally feels when trying to save the economy from imminent collapse.

Carl Maxim

Southsea, Hants

Somehow that seems appropriate, considering how crappy I am feeling today.

About 2 years ago I sued my bank, Barclays Bank plc, in the Salford County Court for thousands of pounds worth of ridiculous bank charges (and accrued interest over time) that they had debited from my account over a 6 year period. They callously removed funds from my account on a regular basis for going over my overdraft limit, something they allowed to happen, which questions what purpose my “agreed overdraft limit” served at the time, if they were happy to let me go over it, then charge ridiculous sums for it.

In some cases, Barclays refused to pay direct debits of just a few pounds, but then charged me a fee of around £30, to bounce a direct debit of less than £10.

After picking up the story on the Penalty Charges Forum and The Consumer Action Group I decided to begin action in the small claims court and submitted my claim. As my case came to be heard, I prepared my court bundle and sat waiting to put my case across to the judge.

Barclays didn’t bother to show on the day, but the judge had already made his mind up long before I walked into his chambers and put a “stay” on my case until such time as the High Court made a ruling.

Last week, the High Court ruled that the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) could indeed determine if the charges are fair and we are but the last step from some form of redress (and hopefully refund) from the banks.

I urge anyone who has ever been charged for bounced direct debits, standing orders or cheques or “unathorised” overdraft fees to lodge a complaint with your local county court against your bank and begin the process of claiming back these unfair charges.

Useful links:
Penalty Charges Forum and The Consumer Action Group