RichardS

Yup - I could not have said it better myself!! Nice one Joel; great club spirit matey, cheers!!! Richard:bow:

Wow - nicely done Graham....:thumbup:

I agree Mandy - hopefully the new owner will pick it up for a bargain and restore it to its former glory....:clover: LOL - I can believe that matey; I've met your dad and know what he'd do if it wasn't....:lol:

Hi and welcome to the club Chris....:thumbup: Ahhh, so you bought Pab's car Chris...!! Top man mate; that's a tidy ZX you have there!! Richard:cool:

Photos are essential - although whilst I am not so sure on whether the dimensions of the offending 'hole count; I do know that there is a reasonable time frame in which the council must be permitted to have had the chance to inspect/repair the damage. For example, if it happened yesterday afternoon; and the pot hole only appeared yesterday morning, then it would not have been reasonable for the council to have known about it. However if it has been there for weeks and nothing has happened; then you are within your rights to claim. Under the Freedom of Information Act, you are entitled to have access to the council's inspection records appertaining to the road in question. And if said records show they have inspected the road and duly knew about the 'hole before your vehicle incurred damage, then you will certainly win any claim against them. All councils are as obstructive as possible in order to put you off claiming - but insist on seeing the inspection records; it's your legal right! And if you spot that they knew about the 'hole; forget following their "claims" procedure. Just write a letter enclosing photos - and when you get the usual "follow our procedure" bullshit, just whack in a small claims court summons. They will certainly pay out rather than incur the cost of defending a claim they will most likely lose - and you get to add the cost of issuing the summons to the claim. BUT only do this when you are certain they knew about the pot hole sufficiently before your vehicle was damaged, to have allowed them reasonable time to fix it. Otherwise they will most likely successfully defend your claim!! Richard:cool:

I have been thinking of that for some time mate..... But never actually gotten round to it...:wink: Now there's the thing Andrew.... Mostly the Z; but on a sunny day with the roof down, women tend to notice the Merc. Not sure what that means though....:rofl:

Drove it....:biggrin: The sun was out, so we went of to enjoy the Hampshire countryside for the day.....:thumbup: Stopped in New Alresford and then took the country lanes back towards Basingstoke; before heading up towards Reading to join the M4 home. I met another Zedder (not on the forum yet) whilst re-fuelling at Reading Services too..... I pointed him in the direction of the club, so hopefully he'll be along - he was driving a black SWB and has 3 others in his collection!! Richard:cool:

Steve and Brian are dead right - with most Z32s being 20 years old+ things will have aged and deteriorated; blunting the performance and previously crisp handling it once had. However when you start to replace (or upgrade) key components like suspension and brakes, you will find your car is transformed.....!! In fact even 25 years since launch, the fact that a Z32 with everything working as it should be can still hold its own against many modern high performance cars, is a testament to just how right Nissan got the car back then. When I got my first ZX, it made my old Mk3 Supra feel agricultural in comparison. I compared the Z to both the Mk4 Supra and 3000GT before buying - and as good as the Mk4 Supra actually was, I preferred the 300zx - not to mention it was some £4k cheaper by contrast. The 3000gt did not compare to either!! Back in 2005 I considered upgrading to a 350z - but in all honesty despite the superior handling, I thought the 350z was disappointing. It just was not as good as the car it replaced all those years earlier - so I kept the ZX and spent £10k on a Merc SLK230 as a daily driver. I have since then had 2 Merc SLK350s - my current one is a 2009 (308bhp) model which I bought when it was less than a year old and had around 4,000 miles on the clock. That is superior to the 350z in every way - it's way way faster; much better built and with the AMG upgrade kit, it will out handle and out brake a 350z. And with all the extras, it cost the original owner over £47k almost 12 months earlier...... ......And in all honesty, when I drive the 2 cars back to back; I am reminded just how good the 300zx really is. Yes the Merc is faster - then it is more modern and the engine & 7G tip-'box are much higher tech. But not by the margin one would expect against a 20 year old Nissan!! The Z32 was really a car ahead of its time - as the fact that it "still has IT today" proves:wink: Richard:cool:

Cheers matey - I did have a good day thanks Alan!! Richard:cool:

Thank you for your continued support John - it's most appreciated mate!! Richard:thumbup:

LOL - that too....:tongue:

Sad but true Steve.... ...And again, it also prevent genuine victims from coming forward for fear of not being taken seriously. I am pleased, however, that there have been a couple of high-profile cases recently; where women who have falsely accused men of rape, have actually been named and convicted of their crimes - and handed custodial sentences accordingly.

:yes: What he said....:wink:

Thanks fellas.....:cool::thumbup:

Exactly - and despite my comments above about a "tax on wealth" regarding expensive cars; the likes of Audi/BMW/Mercedes have spent £££s on R&D to reduce the quoted emissions of their bigger cars in order to keep taxes down.... ....For example I pay £280 to tax my SLK (a 2009 "350" model with 308bhp); yet the latest version - which costs circa £45k new - can be taxed for about £160 a year. Simply because MB has fettled with the engine to produce much lower emissions yet still have it produce 306bhp!! Now that's what I call progress!! Richard:wink:

My view - however horrid sex crimes, paedophilia etc are; there should be a statute of limitations on bringing such cases to trial. Granted, the guilty must be punished; however how can anyone (apart from those truly involved) really know exactly what happened 20/30/40/50 years ago? Exactly! In the case of Stuart Hall, he pleaded guilty - but what if he had not? The law says a jury should only deliver a guilty verdict if they believe "Beyond reasonable doubt" that the accused committed the crime. And surely after so, so many years, the only evidence is each party's word on the matter. And the criminal compensation awards granted to victims today has only served to make matters worse for genuine victims; as said above, if the accusers were so adamant they were abused then why not bring the matter to the police at the time. Sorry - it's all wrong; and the celebrities at the heart of the scandal have had their names dragged through the mud on the basis of hearsay. Yet many of the victims get to remain anonymous; leaving innocent men to rebuild their lives after having them turned upside down. With the DLT case, there is also the issue of what was acceptable behaviour 40 years ago compared to today. Again, whilst I agree that each of us (women and men) has a right to our own personal space; if it was generally accepted as fun, horseplay etc back in the 1970s to slap a women on the bum [etc] as a laugh (no matter that we quite rightly think it wrong today), then we must not seek to retrospectively apply our modern standards to historic actions. I do believe that Jimmy Saville was probably a vile sexual predator (my own personal opinion; nothing to do with the club/forum/committee), but in spite of all that has transpired he remains dead. His secrets duly died with him and, however unfortunate or wrong it may be, any alleged victims are unlikely to get justice. But that is no excuse for the CPS to waste our tax monies on pursuing futile cases against other celebrities from the same era, which can never really be proven beyond reasonable doubt, in the wake of the Jimmy Saville allegations. In short; no hard physical evidence [should] = no prosecution. Sorry to any (alleged) victims; get over it - you should have said something 40 years ago!! Richard

I have to say, I agree with the OP on this one..... Each and every vehicle using the road should pay a single rate of road tax like in the olden days - or the whole RFL scheme should be axed and we all only pay tax on fuel as we drive. The daft idea introduced by that one-eyed lunatic who once governed us, whereby road tax is based on emissions is just barmy. A Prius has just the same impact on the road and subsequent congestion as a Q7; assuming they are both driven the same mileage, so why target the Q7? Exactly, a tax on wealth... Sorry Mr Brown, but taxing wealth is supposed to be the preserve of income tax; hence why it is so named:nono: And as cars get older, they get cheaper to buy; so the above daft idea then serves to penalise the less well off when they eventually purchase a second hand bigger car for peanuts. Whilst the original idea was Brown's fault, the present government has not seen fit to re-address the issue; since it too was originally hoodwinked by the "green lobby" in attempt to remain in touch with their green credentials. Thing is, there is only so much green nonsense the public will take - when it really starts to hammer each and every one of us in our pockets (whether that be with road tax, petrol tax or even our gas/electric bills), then the public [hopefully] will see sense and cast their vote accordingly. Richard

Good luck mate! Richard:clover:

Heh heh; nice one Lee - I hadn't seen that Simpsons episode before....:rofl:

Thanks folks - and late is better then never, for sure....:wink: Richard:thumbup:

Good find mate!!

Yup.....:oops:

LOL - I knew that....:blush::oops:

Thanks again folks - and yes...... We have had a few drinks this evening....:pint: Richard:thumbup:

PMSL - I think you're right mate!!! Thanks folks; had a nice leisurely morning so far and as the sun is out here, I might just take the ZX out for a little birthday blast..... ......It's its 20th birthday any time now (must check V5 to see)....:thumbup: Richard:cool: