Hi peeps

I have a Thompson Sky+ which is less than 12 months old.  Last night I 
noticed a problem when viewing Discovery home and leisure channel (or 
whatever it's called - channel 250).  Basically, the picture breaks up / 
starts / stops quite alot to a point where it is un-watchable.  I have 
turned the digibox off at the mains for several minutes then switched back 
on and the problem was still there. I tried channel 250 again this lunch 
time and the problem still existed.  Both feeds are showing a signal 
strength of around 90% with a quality of about 80% (as it has been since 
last August when it was installed).  I am not sure if the problem exists on 
other channels, only noticed it on 250.

I am going to give it a few days and see if the issue gets any better / 
worse before ringing Sky.

Could this be a faulty digibox or LNB?

"Slider"  wrote in message news:g3b3dv$o5n$1@aioe.org...
> Hi peeps
>
> I have a Thompson Sky+ which is less than 12 months old.  Last night I 
> noticed a problem when viewing Discovery home and leisure channel (or 
> whatever it's called - channel 250).  Basically, the picture breaks up / 
> starts / stops quite alot to a point where it is un-watchable.  I have 
> turned the digibox off at the mains for several minutes then switched back 
> on and the problem was still there. I tried channel 250 again this lunch 
> time and the problem still existed.  Both feeds are showing a signal 
> strength of around 90% with a quality of about 80% (as it has been since 
> last August when it was installed).  I am not sure if the problem exists 
> on other channels, only noticed it on 250.
>
> I am going to give it a few days and see if the issue gets any better / 
> worse before ringing Sky.
>
> Could this be a faulty digibox or LNB?

I think you SHOULD test your system to see if the problem exists on other 
channels. If it only exists on channel 250 it is unlikely to be a fault with 
your equipment.

"Slider"  wrote in message
news:g3b3dv$o5n$1@aioe.org...
> Hi peeps
>
> I have a Thompson Sky+ which is less than 12 months old.  Last night I
> noticed a problem when viewing Discovery home and leisure channel (or
> whatever it's called - channel 250).  Basically, the picture breaks up
> / starts / stops quite alot to a point where it is un-watchable.  I
> have turned the digibox off at the mains for several minutes then
> switched back on and the problem was still there. I tried channel 250
> again this lunch time and the problem still existed.  Both feeds are
> showing a signal strength of around 90% with a quality of about 80%
> (as it has been since last August when it was installed).  I am not
> sure if the problem exists on other channels, only noticed it on 250.
>
> I am going to give it a few days and see if the issue gets any better
> / worse before ringing Sky.
>
> Could this be a faulty digibox or LNB?
>


Yes.  It could be either - or caused by other faults.  Possible causes 
might include:

a)    incorrect dish alignment (most probable)
b)    a faulty LNB
c)    faulty download co-ax cable
d)    a fault with your receiver
e)    adverse weather conditions, such as torrential rain
g)    a "temporary" problem with the transponder that transmits
Discovery Real Time (EPG No. 250)
f)     new vegetation, such as a tree, that is obstructing the line of
sight between your dish and satellite

As a first step, use the Services / Set-up menu and perform a signal
test.  The signal test, does not provide an accurate measurement 
Furthermore, it merely tests the signal from the default transponder, 
which might differ significantly from the transponder that carries 
Discovery Real Time.  Even so, strength and quality readings for both 
LNBs should exceed 60% as an absolute minimum, preferably more.  Lower 
readings would point to problems with dish alignment, the LNB and/or the 
download co-ax cable.

If you have low signal or quality readings, check that you don't have
vegetation blocking the line of sight.  (If so, this would not be
covered by your warranty and you would need remove the obstruction 
yourself).  Otherwise, book a free service call from Sky, whilst your 
installation is still under warranty.

Incidentally, can you receive other channels, which share the
same transponder (Transponder 9, Astra 2A, frequency 11,876 - 2/3 H).
AFAIK, the following channels are on the same transponder.  However, I
obtained this info from a Spanish website, which may not be up to date:

Discovery Home & Health (and +1) EPG 264/265
Discovery Travel & Living  EPG 283
Discovery Channel (and +1) EPG 520/521
Discovery Civilisation EPG 522
Discovery Science EPG 523
Discovery Wings EPG 524
Discovery Animal Planet EPG 535
Discovery Kids EPG 615

"Bob Lucas"  wrote in message 
news:g3bd7t$l6c$1@news.datemas.de...
> "Slider"  wrote in message
> news:g3b3dv$o5n$1@aioe.org...
>> Hi peeps
>>
>> I have a Thompson Sky+ which is less than 12 months old.  Last night I
>> noticed a problem when viewing Discovery home and leisure channel (or
>> whatever it's called - channel 250).  Basically, the picture breaks up
>> / starts / stops quite alot to a point where it is un-watchable.  I
>> have turned the digibox off at the mains for several minutes then
>> switched back on and the problem was still there. I tried channel 250
>> again this lunch time and the problem still existed.  Both feeds are
>> showing a signal strength of around 90% with a quality of about 80%
>> (as it has been since last August when it was installed).  I am not
>> sure if the problem exists on other channels, only noticed it on 250.
>>
>> I am going to give it a few days and see if the issue gets any better
>> / worse before ringing Sky.
>>
>> Could this be a faulty digibox or LNB?
>>
>
>
> Yes.  It could be either - or caused by other faults.  Possible causes 
> might include:
>
> a)    incorrect dish alignment (most probable)
> b)    a faulty LNB
> c)    faulty download co-ax cable
> d)    a fault with your receiver
> e)    adverse weather conditions, such as torrential rain
> g)    a "temporary" problem with the transponder that transmits
> Discovery Real Time (EPG No. 250)
> f)     new vegetation, such as a tree, that is obstructing the line of
> sight between your dish and satellite
>
> As a first step, use the Services / Set-up menu and perform a signal
> test.  The signal test, does not provide an accurate measurement 
> Furthermore, it merely tests the signal from the default transponder, 
> which might differ significantly from the transponder that carries 
> Discovery Real Time.  Even so, strength and quality readings for both LNBs 
> should exceed 60% as an absolute minimum, preferably more.  Lower readings 
> would point to problems with dish alignment, the LNB and/or the download 
> co-ax cable.
>
> If you have low signal or quality readings, check that you don't have
> vegetation blocking the line of sight.  (If so, this would not be
> covered by your warranty and you would need remove the obstruction 
> yourself).  Otherwise, book a free service call from Sky, whilst your 
> installation is still under warranty.
>
> Incidentally, can you receive other channels, which share the
> same transponder (Transponder 9, Astra 2A, frequency 11,876 - 2/3 H).
> AFAIK, the following channels are on the same transponder.  However, I
> obtained this info from a Spanish website, which may not be up to date:
>
> Discovery Home & Health (and +1) EPG 264/265
> Discovery Travel & Living  EPG 283
> Discovery Channel (and +1) EPG 520/521
> Discovery Civilisation EPG 522
> Discovery Science EPG 523
> Discovery Wings EPG 524
> Discovery Animal Planet EPG 535
> Discovery Kids EPG 615
>
>
>

Thanks very much.  Haven't had time to have a detailed checked of other 
channels although I notice this morning that DMAX channel suffered the same 
problem.

Also the signal test (strength / quality) was jumping about quite alot this 
morning.  Dropping to about 50%, then going up to about 80%.
We do have quite a large tree in the back garden but that has been there way 
before Sky was installed last August.  Will check the channels you mention 
above, see if they are affected.  Thanks

"Slider"  wrote in message 
news:g3d9lr$9k9$1@aioe.org...
>
<snip>
>
> Thanks very much.  Haven't had time to have a detailed checked of 
> other channels although I notice this morning that DMAX channel 
> suffered the same problem.
>
> Also the signal test (strength / quality) was jumping about quite 
> alot this morning.  Dropping to about 50%, then going up to about 
> 80%.

Hmm, weather conditions have become much damper over night in much of 
the country, is the signal better after a few dry days?

> We do have quite a large tree in the back garden but that has been 
> there way before Sky was installed last August.

Trees do grow, even old ones, more to the point old ones tend to put 
on girth rather than height.

":Jerry:" <INVALID@INVALID.INVALID> wrote in message 
news:g3db9l$drs$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>
> "Slider"  wrote in message 
> news:g3d9lr$9k9$1@aioe.org...
>>
> <snip>
>>
>> Thanks very much.  Haven't had time to have a detailed checked of 
>> other channels although I notice this morning that DMAX channel 
>> suffered the same problem.
>>
>> Also the signal test (strength / quality) was jumping about quite 
>> alot this morning.  Dropping to about 50%, then going up to about 
>> 80%.
>
> Hmm, weather conditions have become much damper over night in much of 
> the country, is the signal better after a few dry days?
>
>> We do have quite a large tree in the back garden but that has been 
>> there way before Sky was installed last August.
>
> Trees do grow, even old ones, more to the point old ones tend to put 
> on girth rather than height.
>

Sadly, vegetation problems become more apparent during spring and 
summer.  The elevation between dish and satellite may be higher than 
many trees - but evergreens (such as leylandii, etc) can become very 
tall and obstruct the signal.

Problems are not confined to evergreens and in windy weather, tree 
branches tend to blow about and interfere with reception.  This might 
account for fluctuating signal readings and if the tree is causing your 
signal break-up, the situation is likely to get worse.

So what do you do about the problem?  These symptoms could still be 
triggered by any of the other causes listed my previous response.  If 
breakup is confined to one transponder, I would still suspect minor dish 
alignment problems as a possible cause.

I think you should call for professional help, because your installation 
is still within the initial 12-month warranty.  You are entitled to book 
a free service call from Sky.

If a tree does prove to be the culprit, Sky should not have installed 
your dish in its present location.  If so, I hope it will be possible to 
re-locate the dish at no cost to yourself.

If there is no other location for the dish, you will need to cut back 
the offending vegetation (at your own expense).   This happened to me - 
so I hope the tree is not covered by a tree preservation order or 
conservation area regulations.

"Bob Lucas"  wrote in message 
news:g3dkj3$5lf$1@news.datemas.de...
> ":Jerry:" <INVALID@INVALID.INVALID> wrote in message 
> news:g3db9l$drs$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>>
>> "Slider"  wrote in message 
>> news:g3d9lr$9k9$1@aioe.org...
>>>
>> <snip>
>>>
>>> Thanks very much.  Haven't had time to have a detailed checked of other 
>>> channels although I notice this morning that DMAX channel suffered the 
>>> same problem.
>>>
>>> Also the signal test (strength / quality) was jumping about quite alot 
>>> this morning.  Dropping to about 50%, then going up to about 80%.
>>
>> Hmm, weather conditions have become much damper over night in much of the 
>> country, is the signal better after a few dry days?
>>
>>> We do have quite a large tree in the back garden but that has been there 
>>> way before Sky was installed last August.
>>
>> Trees do grow, even old ones, more to the point old ones tend to put on 
>> girth rather than height.
>>
>
> Sadly, vegetation problems become more apparent during spring and summer. 
> The elevation between dish and satellite may be higher than many trees - 
> but evergreens (such as leylandii, etc) can become very tall and obstruct 
> the signal.
>
> Problems are not confined to evergreens and in windy weather, tree 
> branches tend to blow about and interfere with reception.  This might 
> account for fluctuating signal readings and if the tree is causing your 
> signal break-up, the situation is likely to get worse.
>
> So what do you do about the problem?  These symptoms could still be 
> triggered by any of the other causes listed my previous response.  If 
> breakup is confined to one transponder, I would still suspect minor dish 
> alignment problems as a possible cause.
>
> I think you should call for professional help, because your installation 
> is still within the initial 12-month warranty.  You are entitled to book a 
> free service call from Sky.
>
> If a tree does prove to be the culprit, Sky should not have installed your 
> dish in its present location.  If so, I hope it will be possible to 
> re-locate the dish at no cost to yourself.
>
> If there is no other location for the dish, you will need to cut back the 
> offending vegetation (at your own expense).   This happened to me - so I 
> hope the tree is not covered by a tree preservation order or conservation 
> area regulations.

Thanks for the reply.  Will book a Sky call out and see what they say.

"Slider"  wrote in message news:g3b3dv$o5n$1@aioe.org...
> I am not sure if the problem exists on other channels, only noticed it on 
> 250.

Good grief! Isn't it obvious that you should try all channels and note the 
results before troubling us? We are very busy men you know.

Bill

"Bill Wright"  wrote in message 
news:r7udnXuF-KVvLMDVnZ2dnUVZ8t3inZ2d@pipex.net...
>
> "Slider"  wrote in message news:g3b3dv$o5n$1@aioe.org...
>> I am not sure if the problem exists on other channels, only noticed it on 
>> 250.
>
> Good grief! Isn't it obvious that you should try all channels and note the 
> results before troubling us? We are very busy men you know.
>
> Bill
>

sorry to interrupt your "spamming" time Bill.  When is the next instalment 
of "Rigger's Diary"?

"Slider"  wrote in message news:g3nnn2$cl2$1@aioe.org...
>
> "Bill Wright"  wrote in message 
> news:r7udnXuF-KVvLMDVnZ2dnUVZ8t3inZ2d@pipex.net...
>>
>> "Slider"  wrote in message 
>> news:g3b3dv$o5n$1@aioe.org...
>>> I am not sure if the problem exists on other channels, only noticed it 
>>> on 250.
>>
>> Good grief! Isn't it obvious that you should try all channels and note 
>> the results before troubling us? We are very busy men you know.
>>
>> Bill
>>
>
> sorry to interrupt your "spamming" time Bill.  When is the next instalment 
> of "Rigger's Diary"?
>

Actually that reminds me - also noticed break-up and ITV (Channel 103) over 
the weekend.  I am thinking it is the tree at the back of the garden.  The 
tree canopy (spread) is not that great, it must just be in direct line of 
site with the dish.

"Slider"  wrote in message news:g3nnn2$cl2$1@aioe.org...
>
> "Bill Wright"  wrote in message 
> news:r7udnXuF-KVvLMDVnZ2dnUVZ8t3inZ2d@pipex.net...
>>
>> "Slider"  wrote in message 
>> news:g3b3dv$o5n$1@aioe.org...
>>> I am not sure if the problem exists on other channels, only noticed it 
>>> on 250.
>>
>> Good grief! Isn't it obvious that you should try all channels and note 
>> the results before troubling us? We are very busy men you know.
>>
>> Bill
>>
>
> sorry to interrupt your "spamming" time Bill.  When is the next instalment 
> of "Rigger's Diary"?
 The very next time something risible occurs.

Bill

"Bill Wright"  wrote in message 
news:Ad6dnf7-UtTQPcLVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@pipex.net...
>
> "Slider"  wrote in message news:g3nnn2$cl2$1@aioe.org...
>>
>> "Bill Wright"  wrote in message 
>> news:r7udnXuF-KVvLMDVnZ2dnUVZ8t3inZ2d@pipex.net...
>>>
>>> "Slider"  wrote in message 
>>> news:g3b3dv$o5n$1@aioe.org...
>>>> I am not sure if the problem exists on other channels, only noticed it 
>>>> on 250.
>>>
>>> Good grief! Isn't it obvious that you should try all channels and note 
>>> the results before troubling us? We are very busy men you know.
>>>
>>> Bill
>>>
>>
>> sorry to interrupt your "spamming" time Bill.  When is the next 
>> instalment of "Rigger's Diary"?
> The very next time something risible occurs.
>
> Bill
>

That hasn't stopped you in the past - hence the spamming comment!

"Slider"  wrote in message news:g3o7e6$8va$1@aioe.org...
>
> "Bill Wright"  wrote in message 
> news:Ad6dnf7-UtTQPcLVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@pipex.net...
>>
>> "Slider"  wrote in message 
>> news:g3nnn2$cl2$1@aioe.org...
>>>
>>> "Bill Wright"  wrote in message 
>>> news:r7udnXuF-KVvLMDVnZ2dnUVZ8t3inZ2d@pipex.net...
>>>>
>>>> "Slider"  wrote in message 
>>>> news:g3b3dv$o5n$1@aioe.org...
>>>>> I am not sure if the problem exists on other channels, only noticed it 
>>>>> on 250.
>>>>
>>>> Good grief! Isn't it obvious that you should try all channels and note 
>>>> the results before troubling us? We are very busy men you know.
>>>>
>>>> Bill
>>>>
>>>
>>> sorry to interrupt your "spamming" time Bill.  When is the next 
>>> instalment of "Rigger's Diary"?
>> The very next time something risible occurs.
>>
>> Bill
>>
>
> That hasn't stopped you in the past - hence the spamming comment!
>
>

Had Sky around over the weekend.  Cobra who Sky sub-contracted work to no 
longer hold the contract, now a company called AVC so something.
Engineer thought it may be the tree at the bottom of the garden so 
re-located the dish to the opposite side of the house.  Even put a brand new 
dish and LNB and even siliconed the old bolt holes (although I did ask him 
to do this).

Hopefully Sky will send a questionnaire about the service call asking about 
the quality of the service as this guy was very good.  Took his shoes off 
when entering the house, cleared up all the rubbish and generally a good 
guy.

> Had Sky around over the weekend.  Cobra who Sky sub-contracted work to no 
> longer hold the contract, now a company called AVC so something.
> Engineer thought it may be the tree at the bottom of the garden so 
> re-located the dish to the opposite side of the house.  Even put a brand 
> new dish and LNB and even siliconed the old bolt holes (although I did ask 
> him to do this).
>
> Hopefully Sky will send a questionnaire about the service call asking 
> about the quality of the service as this guy was very good.  Took his 
> shoes off when entering the house, cleared up all the rubbish and 
> generally a good guy.
>

But did it fix the problem????

"Malcolm H"  wrote in message 
news:JSFak.147557$8k.126576@newsfe18.ams2...
>> Had Sky around over the weekend.  Cobra who Sky sub-contracted work to no 
>> longer hold the contract, now a company called AVC so something.
>> Engineer thought it may be the tree at the bottom of the garden so 
>> re-located the dish to the opposite side of the house.  Even put a brand 
>> new dish and LNB and even siliconed the old bolt holes (although I did 
>> ask him to do this).
>>
>> Hopefully Sky will send a questionnaire about the service call asking 
>> about the quality of the service as this guy was very good.  Took his 
>> shoes off when entering the house, cleared up all the rubbish and 
>> generally a good guy.
>>
>
> But did it fix the problem????

Well, thought so until last night.  Watching a programme and it just started 
stuttering / breaking up.  Checked the signal quality and input 1 had 
dropped to almost zero.  Checked again 2 mins later and it was back up near 
75%

In article <g4fdlu$oil$1@aioe.org>,
	Slider wrote:

> Well, thought so until last night.  Watching a programme and it just started 
> stuttering / breaking up.  Checked the signal quality and input 1 had 
> dropped to almost zero.  Checked again 2 mins later and it was back up near 
> 75% 

Was it chucking it down outside at the time?

-- 
Paul Martin

"Paul Martin"  wrote in message 
news:slrng6mfgl.3gu.pm@thinkpad.nowster.org.uk...
> In article <g4fdlu$oil$1@aioe.org>,
> Slider wrote:
>
>> Well, thought so until last night.  Watching a programme and it just 
>> started
>> stuttering / breaking up.  Checked the signal quality and input 1 had
>> dropped to almost zero.  Checked again 2 mins later and it was back up 
>> near
>> 75%
>
> Was it chucking it down outside at the time?
>
> -- 
> Paul Martin 

It was raining last night yes

> It was raining last night yes

Get a Lidl 80cm dish with Silvercrest 40mm
collar dual LNB, never looked back, should
cope with the occasional UK monsoon.
Under 15quid, full house signal quality
and strength.

"Slider"  wrote in message news:g4fdlu$oil$1@aioe.org...
>>> Hopefully Sky will send a questionnaire about the service call asking 
>>> about the quality of the service as this guy was very good.  Took his 
>>> shoes off when entering the house, cleared up all the rubbish and 
>>> generally a good guy.

You were very inconsiderate not putting floor covers down. It's a nuisance 
constantly taking your shoes off when you're going in and out trying to 
trace a fault, fetch things from the van, etc. Every trip out means that 
whatever you bring back in you have to put down just to take your shoes off, 
then bend down to to pick everything up again. It really slows the job down, 
and of course there's the temptation (amongst some lazy installers) to make 
do and mend just to save a trip to the van. And with no floor covers where 
do you put the analyser when you make measurements indoors? It will likely 
have a dirty bottom.

>> But did it fix the problem????
>
> Well, thought so until last night.  Watching a programme and it just 
> started stuttering / breaking up.  Checked the signal quality and input 1 
> had dropped to almost zero.  Checked again 2 mins later and it was back up 
> near 75%

Wait until the rainy weather has moved on before you worry.

Bill

"Bill Wright"  wrote in message 
news:yOadnRlvHIKsBPbVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@pipex.net...
>
<snip>
>
> You were very inconsiderate not putting floor covers down. It's a 
> nuisance constantly taking your shoes off when you're going in and 
> out trying to trace a fault, fetch things from the van, etc. <snip>

When you have a painter around to paint your front room Bill, do you 
or the painter supply the 'dust covers'?....

"Jerry" <INVALID@INVALID.INVALID> wrote in message 
news:g4g6ah$6go$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>
> "Bill Wright"  wrote in message 
> news:yOadnRlvHIKsBPbVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@pipex.net...
>>
> <snip>
>>
>> You were very inconsiderate not putting floor covers down. It's a 
>> nuisance constantly taking your shoes off when you're going in and out 
>> trying to trace a fault, fetch things from the van, etc. <snip>
>
> When you have a painter around to paint your front room Bill, do you or 
> the painter supply the 'dust covers'?....

Firstly I must make it clear that I am always highly considerate of 
householder's wishes in this as in all other respects. That's not merely a 
part of being professional; it's simple good manners.

The example you give is invalid because dust covers are an integral part of 
the job of interior decoration. The requirement to take one's shoes off when 
entering a building to do a clean job is far from universal. Obviously 
common sense must be used, and if everyone in the house customarily walks 
around in their socks then fair enough, when in Rome, etc (I'll never forget 
working in that nudist colony). But when the said shoes are perfectly clean, 
having been in the vehicle and then on the customer's front path, and the 
floor inside the house doesn't appear to be all that sparkling, the demand 
to take shoes off starts to have additional dimensions. I remember once 
being asked to take my shoes off, having just stepped out of the van. While 
I was there the doctor arrived to tend to someone upstairs. There was no 
question of asking him to remove his shoes!

To generalise, people in really massive houses (stately homes etc) rarely 
ask for shoes to be removed. The most likely ones are those who have council 
houses like palaces. This could be because the carpet has been a major item 
for them to afford.

The current craze for white carpets has a lot to answer for. Many young 
couples carpet the hall and lounge in white, and boy oh boy do they rue that 
choice!

Incidentally, one of the young installers in this area (Simon of Absolute 
Aerials) has been sent a bill for £1,500 for a new carpet, the customer 
alleging that he has marked the old one. There is a suspicion that this 
person is trying it on.

Bill

"Bill Wright"  wrote in message 
news:DKKdnUXAfoBdXfbVnZ2dnUVZ8qPinZ2d@pipex.net...
>
> "Jerry" <INVALID@INVALID.INVALID> wrote in message 
> news:g4g6ah$6go$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>>
>> "Bill Wright"  wrote in message 
>> news:yOadnRlvHIKsBPbVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@pipex.net...
>>>
>> <snip>
>>>
>>> You were very inconsiderate not putting floor covers down. It's a 
>>> nuisance constantly taking your shoes off when you're going in and out 
>>> trying to trace a fault, fetch things from the van, etc. <snip>
>>
>> When you have a painter around to paint your front room Bill, do you or 
>> the painter supply the 'dust covers'?....
>
> Firstly I must make it clear that I am always highly considerate of 
> householder's wishes in this as in all other respects. That's not merely a 
> part of being professional; it's simple good manners.
>
> The example you give is invalid because dust covers are an integral part 
> of the job of interior decoration. The requirement to take one's shoes off 
> when entering a building to do a clean job is far from universal. 
> Obviously common sense must be used, and if everyone in the house 
> customarily walks around in their socks then fair enough, when in Rome, 
> etc (I'll never forget working in that nudist colony). But when the said 
> shoes are perfectly clean, having been in the vehicle and then on the 
> customer's front path, and the floor inside the house doesn't appear to be 
> all that sparkling, the demand to take shoes off starts to have additional 
> dimensions. I remember once being asked to take my shoes off, having just 
> stepped out of the van. While I was there the doctor arrived to tend to 
> someone upstairs. There was no question of asking him to remove his shoes!
>
> To generalise, people in really massive houses (stately homes etc) rarely 
> ask for shoes to be removed. The most likely ones are those who have 
> council houses like palaces. This could be because the carpet has been a 
> major item for them to afford.
>
> The current craze for white carpets has a lot to answer for. Many young 
> couples carpet the hall and lounge in white, and boy oh boy do they rue 
> that choice!
>
> Incidentally, one of the young installers in this area (Simon of Absolute 
> Aerials) has been sent a bill for £1,500 for a new carpet, the customer 
> alleging that he has marked the old one. There is a suspicion that this 
> person is trying it on.
>
> Bill
>

Do you take you shoes off Bill when entering your own house ?

If so, then I'd expect you would do the same at your customers premises 
regardless of the condition / cleanliness of shoes or your customers 
carpets!

"Bill Wright"  wrote in message 
news:DKKdnUXAfoBdXfbVnZ2dnUVZ8qPinZ2d@pipex.net...
>
> "Jerry" <INVALID@INVALID.INVALID> wrote in message 
> news:g4g6ah$6go$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>>
>> "Bill Wright"  wrote in message 
>> news:yOadnRlvHIKsBPbVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@pipex.net...
>>>
>> <snip>
>>>
>>> You were very inconsiderate not putting floor covers down. It's a 
>>> nuisance constantly taking your shoes off when you're going in and 
>>> out trying to trace a fault, fetch things from the van, etc. 
>>> <snip>
>>
>> When you have a painter around to paint your front room Bill, do 
>> you or the painter supply the 'dust covers'?....
>
> Firstly I must make it clear that I am always highly considerate of 
> householder's wishes in this as in all other respects. That's not 
> merely a part of being professional; it's simple good manners.
>
> The example you give is invalid because dust covers are an integral 
> part of the job of interior decoration.
<snip>

As they are in *any* 'service' trade were the trader is dealing with 
the property of the customer, for example the motor trade will 
(should...) place seat, foot-well and steering wheel covers into a car 
before anyone who might have work place dirt on them gets into the 
car - of course the garage could take the view that if the customer 
didn't want oily foot, hand and bum prints smudged around the inside 
of their car they should have supplied their own covers, but they 
might also be wondering why their have little custom...

"Slider"  wrote in message news:g4i53f$783$1@aioe.org...
> Do you take you shoes off Bill when entering your own house ?
Of course not. My attitude to floors is that they are intended to walk on. 
Anyway, I wouldn't want to get my socks covered in dog hairs and bits of 
food, or risk getting them wet from beer spillages.

But joking apart, of course I respect other people's right to have a 
spotless floor that can't be walked on. An Englishman's home is his castle.

>
> If so, then I'd expect you would do the same at your customers premises 
> regardless of the condition / cleanliness of shoes or your customers 
> carpets!
That would be a bizairre expectation. Some of the houses we work in have 
floors that you definitly don't want to let your socks touch. And apart from 
these filthy lowlife types, I would say that the large majority of people, 
if they saw you taking off a clean pair of shoes, would think you were a bit 
'funny'.

Bill

"Jerry" <INVALID@INVALID.INVALID> wrote in message 
news:g4i5vo$5bh$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>> The example you give is invalid because dust covers are an integral part 
>> of the job of interior decoration.
> <snip>
>
> As they are in *any* 'service' trade were the trader is dealing with the 
> property of the customer, for example the motor trade will (should...) 
> place seat, foot-well and steering wheel covers into a car before anyone 
> who might have work place dirt on them gets into the car - of course the 
> garage could take the view that if the customer didn't want oily foot, 
> hand and bum prints smudged around the inside of their car they should 
> have supplied their own covers, but they might also be wondering why their 
> have little custom...

Again, the risk of getting oil on the upholstery when the mechanic has a 
good chance of having it on his overalls is so high that some sort of 
precautions are essential. Let's not lose sight of what we're on about here. 
We aren't talking about any process that makes a mess. We are talking about 
walking across a floor wearing clean shoes. Of course it's up to the 
householder to run the house just as they chose, and if they want everyone 
to take their shoes off that's their choice, but the majority of people seem 
to take the view that floor coverings should stand up to normal wear and 
tear. Of course, when the carpet's brand new and the writing of the cheque 
is still a painful memory, anyone would insist on shoes coming off, even if 
they were spotless!

Bill

"Bill Wright"  wrote in message 
news:qIqdnSv8jPAzufDVRVnyhgA@pipex.net...
>
> "Slider"  wrote in message news:g4i53f$783$1@aioe.org...
>> Do you take you shoes off Bill when entering your own house ?
> Of course not. My attitude to floors is that they are intended to walk on. 
> Anyway, I wouldn't want to get my socks covered in dog hairs and bits of 
> food, or risk getting them wet from beer spillages.
>
> But joking apart, of course I respect other people's right to have a 
> spotless floor that can't be walked on. An Englishman's home is his 
> castle.
>
>>
>> If so, then I'd expect you would do the same at your customers premises 
>> regardless of the condition / cleanliness of shoes or your customers 
>> carpets!
> That would be a bizairre expectation. Some of the houses we work in have 
> floors that you definitly don't want to let your socks touch. And apart 
> from these filthy lowlife types, I would say that the large majority of 
> people, if they saw you taking off a clean pair of shoes, would think you 
> were a bit 'funny'.
>
> Bill
>

> I would say that the large majority of people, if they saw you taking off 
> a clean pair of shoes, would think you were a bit 'funny'.

More like respectful of their property!

On  4-Jul-2008, "Slider"  wrote:

> > I would say that the large majority of people, if they saw you taking
> > off
> > a clean pair of shoes, would think you were a bit 'funny'.
>
> More like respectful of their property!

I thought there were elasticated slip overs that go quickly over
your shoes??????

wrote in message 
news:QDmbk.2869$7v1.907@newsfe30.ams2...
>
> On  4-Jul-2008, "Slider"  wrote:
>
>> > I would say that the large majority of people, if they saw you taking
>> > off
>> > a clean pair of shoes, would think you were a bit 'funny'.
>>
>> More like respectful of their property!
>
> I thought there were elasticated slip overs that go quickly over
> your shoes??????

I think you lot are being deliberately  awkward over this(LOL).  Seriously. 
Some houses you have to wipe your feet to come out as they are so filthy and 
the road is a lot cleaner.

I used to follow  simple rules.

In my repair days.
If the weather was nasty and the house was clean. take off shoes.
If the weather was good and the house was clean.offer to  take off shoes.

If the house was filthy ( or more  often unfinished decorating) Keep shoes 
on.
Mostly people are blessed with commonsense and it is not an issue.

When I was in direct sales:
 I always asked if I should take off my shoes and the people normally 
responded in the commonsense way.

Hay- if you employ a person on an hourly rate and then delay them it is more 
money earned for them.

Gary

"Gary"  wrote in message 
news:RRnbk.142459$P83.33890@newsfe20.ams2...
> Hay- if you employ a person on an hourly rate and then delay them it is 
> more money earned for them.
>
> Gary

How long does it take you to take off your shoes?  Do you wear Doc Martin's 
to work?

wrote in message 
news:QDmbk.2869$7v1.907@newsfe30.ams2...
>
> On  4-Jul-2008, "Slider"  wrote:
>
>> > I would say that the large majority of people, if they saw you taking
>> > off
>> > a clean pair of shoes, would think you were a bit 'funny'.
>>
>> More like respectful of their property!
>
> I thought there were elasticated slip overs that go quickly over
> your shoes??????

Yes, I have a box of blue thingys. Also good for putting over the top end of 
a ladder when leaning it against in interior wall.

Bill

"Gary"  wrote in message 
news:RRnbk.142459$P83.33890@newsfe20.ams2...
> I used to follow  simple rules.

We worked at a big house a few years ago where the owner was a really nasty 
piece of work. He was a pathological bully (short arse of course) and on one 
occasion I had to tell him what's what when he had a right go at a young lad 
for nowt.

He used to insist on blue shoe covers, and (get this) he insisted that we 
wore rubber gloves before we handled his remote handsets. If anyone didn't 
he had a right paddy fit and said he would throw the remote away and 
contracharge for a new one!

I mentioned this place on here a while back. It was the one where he rung 
after six months later with the story that the 'whole TV system had failed'. 
The cause? The TV shop had installed three plasmas and left them on system 
BG, hence a rushing noise on the CCTV channels. I sent him a fine elegant 
invoice and to give him his due he paid up like a good un.

Bill