Last May my daughter (16) came to live with me. Because I had been 
assessed for the two them living with her, I phoned and asked for a re-
assessment. Was told this not possible for 6 months. Said, OK, I want to 
claim against her for the 16yo. Was asked if I was in receipt of Child 
Benefit? No, not yet. Oh well, call back when you are.
A month later I got the Child Benefit through, so called again and said 
"Got it". "We'll get someone to call you back". Never did. Called again 
in November. I had been off sick and was on Statuary Sick Pay - LESS 
than I was assessed for. Again asked for re-assessment. Again told 'not 
for 6 months'. Asked about my claim. They said they'd get someone to 
call. Haven't yet.

So why is it when SHE applied, I was assessed within a week?

I can only assume that women receive immediate attention, while men get 
the brush off.

When o' when are you people going to learn that talking to these bastards on 
the phone is an exercise in futility?

Put everything in writing, copy it to your MP, tell them it's being coppied 
to your MP and watch them jump to attention with everything being done as it 
should be done!

If not you have their ass in a sling.


"Me"  wrote in message 
news:MPG.228bdadcf83b19a59896d8@news.tiscali.co.uk...
> Last May my daughter (16) came to live with me. Because I had been
> assessed for the two them living with her, I phoned and asked for a re-
> assessment. Was told this not possible for 6 months. Said, OK, I want to
> claim against her for the 16yo. Was asked if I was in receipt of Child
> Benefit? No, not yet. Oh well, call back when you are.
> A month later I got the Child Benefit through, so called again and said
> "Got it". "We'll get someone to call you back". Never did. Called again
> in November. I had been off sick and was on Statuary Sick Pay - LESS
> than I was assessed for. Again asked for re-assessment. Again told 'not
> for 6 months'. Asked about my claim. They said they'd get someone to
> call. Haven't yet.
>
> So why is it when SHE applied, I was assessed within a week?
>
> I can only assume that women receive immediate attention, while men get
> the brush off.
>
>

Another good tip is to say you are a journalist and phone up and ask to 
speak to a PR representative. It appears journalist are not liked by the 
CSA, but they are also scared you might give them a slagging off in the 
press, so it tends to get your case pushed through a but quicker.

Jon
"Fletcher"  wrote in message 
news:4eSdnenf_6beTrzVnZ2dnUVZ8qKvnZ2d@giganews.com...
> When o' when are you people going to learn that talking to these bastards 
> on the phone is an exercise in futility?
>
> Put everything in writing, copy it to your MP, tell them it's being 
> coppied to your MP and watch them jump to attention with everything being 
> done as it should be done!
>
> If not you have their ass in a sling.
>
>
> "Me"  wrote in message 
> news:MPG.228bdadcf83b19a59896d8@news.tiscali.co.uk...
>> Last May my daughter (16) came to live with me. Because I had been
>> assessed for the two them living with her, I phoned and asked for a re-
>> assessment. Was told this not possible for 6 months. Said, OK, I want to
>> claim against her for the 16yo. Was asked if I was in receipt of Child
>> Benefit? No, not yet. Oh well, call back when you are.
>> A month later I got the Child Benefit through, so called again and said
>> "Got it". "We'll get someone to call you back". Never did. Called again
>> in November. I had been off sick and was on Statuary Sick Pay - LESS
>> than I was assessed for. Again asked for re-assessment. Again told 'not
>> for 6 months'. Asked about my claim. They said they'd get someone to
>> call. Haven't yet.
>>
>> So why is it when SHE applied, I was assessed within a week?
>>
>> I can only assume that women receive immediate attention, while men get
>> the brush off.
>>
>>
>
>

On May 7, 4:27 pm, Me  wrote:
> Last May my daughter (16) came to live with me. Because I had been
> assessed for the two them living with her, I phoned and asked for a re-
> assessment. Was told this not possible for 6 months. Said, OK, I want to
> claim against her for the 16yo. Was asked if I was in receipt of Child
> Benefit? No, not yet. Oh well, call back when you are.
> A month later I got the Child Benefit through, so called again and said
> "Got it". "We'll get someone to call you back". Never did. Called again
> in November. I had been off sick and was on Statuary Sick Pay - LESS
> than I was assessed for. Again asked for re-assessment. Again told 'not
> for 6 months'. Asked about my claim. They said they'd get someone to
> call. Haven't yet.
>
> So why is it when SHE applied, I was assessed within a week?
>
> I can only assume that women receive immediate attention, while men get
> the brush off.

You'll hear many similar stories! When I was divorced from my sons'
mother, we made all the arrangements in court - including me signing
MY house over to her with some £60,000 equity. The CSA became involved
when she claimed some benefit, upped my monthly contribution by nearly
300% but said that the house did not count as a contribution because
it was not a cash payment! Some eight years later I no longer pay for
my eldest (23 year old Royal Marine) but until very recently was still
paying for my second son (19 years old, working full time but awaiting
exam result to go to university) and for my third son (17 years old,
lives with me but is away serving in the Royal Navy at present) and
for my youngest (who at least is still school age and living with his
mother). I phoned them last month to see if I could get the two middle
sons removed from the assessment to be told that they had been, but
the contribution will not changed because they (the CSA) believe that
I can afford to continue paying at the present level! I might just try
Fletcher's idea and try again in writing to see if I can get a
reduction.

sghconnolly@o2.co.uk wrote:
> On May 7, 4:27 pm, Me  wrote:
>> Last May my daughter (16) came to live with me. Because I had been
>> assessed for the two them living with her, I phoned and asked for a re-
>> assessment. Was told this not possible for 6 months. Said, OK, I want to
>> claim against her for the 16yo. Was asked if I was in receipt of Child
>> Benefit? No, not yet. Oh well, call back when you are.
>> A month later I got the Child Benefit through, so called again and said
>> "Got it". "We'll get someone to call you back". Never did. Called again
>> in November. I had been off sick and was on Statuary Sick Pay - LESS
>> than I was assessed for. Again asked for re-assessment. Again told 'not
>> for 6 months'. Asked about my claim. They said they'd get someone to
>> call. Haven't yet.
>>
>> So why is it when SHE applied, I was assessed within a week?
>>
>> I can only assume that women receive immediate attention, while men get
>> the brush off.
> 
> You'll hear many similar stories! When I was divorced from my sons'
> mother, we made all the arrangements in court - including me signing
> MY house over to her with some £60,000 equity. The CSA became involved
> when she claimed some benefit, upped my monthly contribution by nearly
> 300% but said that the house did not count as a contribution because
> it was not a cash payment!

Same thing happened to me. There's no wonder some of us are a bit pissed 
at the CSA and being shafted. Not only that but the ex refused to tell 
the CSA I'd paid for her to have replacement central heating and changed 
the windows for double glazing. Apparently I paid for that because I 
wanted to (I suppose I did) but it didn't change what the CSA took off 
me. I'd have been better off giving her a cheque and writting "for child 
support" on it and letting her pay for the windows and heating.

A lot of it was vindictiveness on her part though, she could have, and 
morally should have said it was a cash payment to her, the cheque was 
made out to her.

We live and learn. Now I'm self-employed and losing money on the 
business so I have a nil rating and long may it stay that way.

Too right mate, they are required by law to stick to their own rules. On the 
phone they can say anything they like (unless they phone me, I use tapes) 
but on paper they must comply with the rules.

So yeh mail them and get it reduced, but remember to copy your MP or they 
spew out the bullshit that they never got the mail!

good luck

 wrote in message 
news:7c685e30-6747-4a82-b7bc-241c26e7d742@d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
On May 7, 4:27 pm, Me  wrote:
> Last May my daughter (16) came to live with me. Because I had been
> assessed for the two them living with her, I phoned and asked for a re-
> assessment. Was told this not possible for 6 months. Said, OK, I want to
> claim against her for the 16yo. Was asked if I was in receipt of Child
> Benefit? No, not yet. Oh well, call back when you are.
> A month later I got the Child Benefit through, so called again and said
> "Got it". "We'll get someone to call you back". Never did. Called again
> in November. I had been off sick and was on Statuary Sick Pay - LESS
> than I was assessed for. Again asked for re-assessment. Again told 'not
> for 6 months'. Asked about my claim. They said they'd get someone to
> call. Haven't yet.
>
> So why is it when SHE applied, I was assessed within a week?
>
> I can only assume that women receive immediate attention, while men get
> the brush off.

You'll hear many similar stories! When I was divorced from my sons'
mother, we made all the arrangements in court - including me signing
MY house over to her with some £60,000 equity. The CSA became involved
when she claimed some benefit, upped my monthly contribution by nearly
300% but said that the house did not count as a contribution because
it was not a cash payment! Some eight years later I no longer pay for
my eldest (23 year old Royal Marine) but until very recently was still
paying for my second son (19 years old, working full time but awaiting
exam result to go to university) and for my third son (17 years old,
lives with me but is away serving in the Royal Navy at present) and
for my youngest (who at least is still school age and living with his
mother). I phoned them last month to see if I could get the two middle
sons removed from the assessment to be told that they had been, but
the contribution will not changed because they (the CSA) believe that
I can afford to continue paying at the present level! I might just try
Fletcher's idea and try again in writing to see if I can get a
reduction.

Some advice..(and a diatribe..but hell..)

Been here too and learned the hard way: no (NO..nowt) ie nothing at all that 
the NRP pays counts for anything unless it is CSA sanctioned. If you don't 
go through them then expect to be 'deadbeat dad' DOEd. Nothing you say/pay 
counts (without evidence) anything she says counts unless you have evidence 
to the contrary (and even then...). Fletcher is right: write,,,I have had a 
good result from a phone call....but you depend upon getting through and to 
the right person and establishing a rapport...and even then some t**t can 
undo it all and deny all knowledge.

Of course it's sexist : most female MPs didn't get there because of 
intelligence/statesperson...B.  Castle, G. Dunwoody (hope sp. ok) excepted. 
What really screwed all the systems was the Target Culture and minimum wage 
basic CSA people. Hit your targets...get on and be praised (no questions 
aked) you are only following instructions.......now, who was that Adolf 
bloke..?..

Ah, but NRPs (Not Really People) can't be equated with...<clearly I can't 
write more here or the PC tossers will wet themselves....the NRP parallel is 
striking though...'and next we will deal with the ...,,problem'>

Short of a Frank Field rebellion (the 10% tax shaft was <as I wrote at the 
time to my MP, J. {hamster} Smith at the time...and was ignored> a travesty 
that would see Labour gone)  the NRP is shafted so much more easily.

The CSA destroys more kids futures than it saves (the serial shaggers are 
free-to-roam if not working), real dads must make up the target totals.The 
name is just spin-drift.

Soon to be 3 (THREE!!!) systems which will penalise kids with dad-contact 
differently...who cares...NOBODY.
So, Gordon is Autistic (yes, he is) but the loons before did no better and 
does anybody seriously expect a sensible, strategic response?

Best advice is|: get out of the UK: dads here are not ever (even if good 
family men) above suspicion. This is the 
'Self-Fulfilling-Prophecy-Society'.....................sing along then!

I wish I had a positive answer but if you are an NRP male in the UK then 
any effort you make can be killed on a whim...hence the growing army (faster 
than the elderly-care problem) of 'poor' Benefit Mummies (er..children in 
poverty). You could weep eh...?

So, do the Fletch: go by post and enclose evidence (photocopy SSP letters 
etc) and say you are enclosing them in your main letter and do send a copy 
to your MP with a 'help!' note and be persistent (your first MP reply will 
be a brush-off)..go to their 'surgery' do 'em face-to face. They hope/expect 
a squeal-and-quiet constituent. Being  not easily silenced and maybe a 
nuisance will stir them into some sort of action (Smith, J...the 'Home 
(Economics) Secretary' needs cattle-prodding) especially now ...push 
hard...Greedy-Gordon and his minions are worried.

Good luck, be PERSISTENT

JB

"Fletcher"  wrote in message 
news:laKdnbqAR6XLV7TVnZ2dnUVZ8vGdnZ2d@giganews.com...
> Too right mate, they are required by law to stick to their own rules. On 
> the phone they can say anything they like (unless they phone me, I use 
> tapes) but on paper they must comply with the rules.
>
> So yeh, mail them and get it reduced, but remember to copy your MP or they 
> spew out the bullshit that they never got the mail!
>
> good luck
>
>  wrote in message 
> news:7c685e30-6747-4a82-b7bc-241c26e7d742@d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> On May 7, 4:27 pm, Me  wrote:
>> Last May my daughter (16) came to live with me. Because I had been
>> assessed for the two them living with her, I phoned and asked for a re-
>> assessment. Was told this not possible for 6 months. Said, OK, I want to
>> claim against her for the 16yo. Was asked if I was in receipt of Child
>> Benefit? No, not yet. Oh well, call back when you are.
>> A month later I got the Child Benefit through, so called again and said
>> "Got it". "We'll get someone to call you back". Never did. Called again
>> in November. I had been off sick and was on Statuary Sick Pay - LESS
>> than I was assessed for. Again asked for re-assessment. Again told 'not
>> for 6 months'. Asked about my claim. They said they'd get someone to
>> call. Haven't yet.
>>
>> So why is it when SHE applied, I was assessed within a week?
>>
>> I can only assume that women receive immediate attention, while men get
>> the brush off.
>
> You'll hear many similar stories! When I was divorced from my sons'
> mother, we made all the arrangements in court - including me signing
> MY house over to her with some £60,000 equity. The CSA became involved
> when she claimed some benefit, upped my monthly contribution by nearly
> 300% but said that the house did not count as a contribution because
> it was not a cash payment! Some eight years later I no longer pay for
> my eldest (23 year old Royal Marine) but until very recently was still
> paying for my second son (19 years old, working full time but awaiting
> exam result to go to university) and for my third son (17 years old,
> lives with me but is away serving in the Royal Navy at present) and
> for my youngest (who at least is still school age and living with his
> mother). I phoned them last month to see if I could get the two middle
> sons removed from the assessment to be told that they had been, but
> the contribution will not changed because they (the CSA) believe that
> I can afford to continue paying at the present level! I might just try
> Fletcher's idea and try again in writing to see if I can get a
> reduction.
>

I had all the usual shit after splitting up from my wife. Gave her the 
house "in full and final settlement". Along comes CSA and says "That 
doesn't count". The split was friendly, so I took her off benefits for a 
few months and she told the CSA to go fuck itself. She was only on 
benefits for a few months after that, and the CSA have never been 
involved since.

With my recent ex, I have sucessfully got them to stop using the term 
"parent with care" on the phone or in correspondance. After all, I am 
NOT the "parent without care". And we have equal custody. And one of the 
kids nominally lives with me (she's away at college).

The only way to sort the CSA out is with a small tactical nuke. Totally 
fucked up idea to begin with, and apparently staffed by Nazis and 
Extremists. I do know that the Plymouth site was built illegally, on 
land inside the National Park and that was donated "for the people of 
Plymouth". Anyone got a spare bulldozer?

In article <4829f310$1_3@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com>, 
sponged@freeserve.co.uk says...
> Some advice..(and a diatribe..but hell..)
> 
> Been here too and learned the hard way: no (NO..nowt) ie nothing at all that 
> the NRP pays counts for anything unless it is CSA sanctioned. If you don't 
> go through them then expect to be 'deadbeat dad' DOEd. Nothing you say/pay 
> counts (without evidence) anything she says counts unless you have evidence 
> to the contrary (and even then...). Fletcher is right: write,,,I have had a 
> good result from a phone call....but you depend upon getting through and to 
> the right person and establishing a rapport...and even then some t**t can 
> undo it all and deny all knowledge.
> 
> Of course it's sexist : most female MPs didn't get there because of 
> intelligence/statesperson...B.  Castle, G. Dunwoody (hope sp. ok) excepted. 
> What really screwed all the systems was the Target Culture and minimum wage 
> basic CSA people. Hit your targets...get on and be praised (no questions 
> aked) you are only following instructions.......now, who was that Adolf 
> bloke..?..
> 
> Ah, but NRPs (Not Really People) can't be equated with...<clearly I can't 
> write more here or the PC tossers will wet themselves....the NRP parallel is 
> striking though...'and next we will deal with the ...,,problem'>
> 
> Short of a Frank Field rebellion (the 10% tax shaft was <as I wrote at the 
> time to my MP, J. {hamster} Smith at the time...and was ignored> a travesty 
> that would see Labour gone)  the NRP is shafted so much more easily.
> 
> The CSA destroys more kids futures than it saves (the serial shaggers are 
> free-to-roam if not working), real dads must make up the target totals.The 
> name is just spin-drift.
> 
> Soon to be 3 (THREE!!!) systems which will penalise kids with dad-contact 
> differently...who cares...NOBODY.
> So, Gordon is Autistic (yes, he is) but the loons before did no better and 
> does anybody seriously expect a sensible, strategic response?
> 
> Best advice is|: get out of the UK: dads here are not ever (even if good 
> family men) above suspicion. This is the 
> 'Self-Fulfilling-Prophecy-Society'.....................sing along then!
> 
> I wish I had a positive answer but if you are an NRP male in the UK then 
> any effort you make can be killed on a whim...hence the growing army (faster 
> than the elderly-care problem) of 'poor' Benefit Mummies (er..children in 
> poverty). You could weep eh...?
> 
> So, do the Fletch: go by post and enclose evidence (photocopy SSP letters 
> etc) and say you are enclosing them in your main letter and do send a copy 
> to your MP with a 'help!' note and be persistent (your first MP reply will 
> be a brush-off)..go to their 'surgery' do 'em face-to face. They hope/expect 
> a squeal-and-quiet constituent. Being  not easily silenced and maybe a 
> nuisance will stir them into some sort of action (Smith, J...the 'Home

On 14 May, 11:48, Me  wrote:
>
> I do know that the Plymouth site was built illegally, on
> land inside the National Park and that was donated "for the people of
> Plymouth". Anyone got a spare bulldozer?
>
I didn't know that.  Sorry I haven't got a spare bulldozer but, if I
can find some dynamite, will that help?

Mr GG

Interesting that they not only steal the peoples money they steal their land 
too!

Any more hard evidence available on this one, would like to promote this 
issue.

"Me"  wrote in message 
news:MPG.2294d3f86db0aeaf989723@news.tiscali.co.uk...
>I had all the usual shit after splitting up from my wife. Gave her the
> house "in full and final settlement". Along comes CSA and says "That
> doesn't count". The split was friendly, so I took her off benefits for a
> few months and she told the CSA to go fuck itself. She was only on
> benefits for a few months after that, and the CSA have never been
> involved since.
>
> With my recent ex, I have sucessfully got them to stop using the term
> "parent with care" on the phone or in correspondance. After all, I am
> NOT the "parent without care". And we have equal custody. And one of the
> kids nominally lives with me (she's away at college).
>
> The only way to sort the CSA out is with a small tactical nuke. Totally
> fucked up idea to begin with, and apparently staffed by Nazis and
> Extremists. I do know that the Plymouth site was built illegally, on
> land inside the National Park and that was donated "for the people of
> Plymouth". Anyone got a spare bulldozer?
>
> In article <4829f310$1_3@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com>,
> sponged@freeserve.co.uk says...
>> Some advice..(and a diatribe..but hell..)
>>
>> Been here too and learned the hard way: no (NO..nowt) ie nothing at all 
>> that
>> the NRP pays counts for anything unless it is CSA sanctioned. If you 
>> don't
>> go through them then expect to be 'deadbeat dad' DOEd. Nothing you 
>> say/pay
>> counts (without evidence) anything she says counts unless you have 
>> evidence
>> to the contrary (and even then...). Fletcher is right: write,,,I have had 
>> a
>> good result from a phone call....but you depend upon getting through and 
>> to
>> the right person and establishing a rapport...and even then some t**t can
>> undo it all and deny all knowledge.
>>
>> Of course it's sexist : most female MPs didn't get there because of
>> intelligence/statesperson...B.  Castle, G. Dunwoody (hope sp. ok) 
>> excepted.
>> What really screwed all the systems was the Target Culture and minimum 
>> wage
>> basic CSA people. Hit your targets...get on and be praised (no questions
>> aked) you are only following instructions.......now, who was that Adolf
>> bloke..?..
>>
>> Ah, but NRPs (Not Really People) can't be equated with...<clearly I can't
>> write more here or the PC tossers will wet themselves....the NRP parallel 
>> is
>> striking though...'and next we will deal with the ...,,problem'>
>>
>> Short of a Frank Field rebellion (the 10% tax shaft was <as I wrote at 
>> the
>> time to my MP, J. {hamster} Smith at the time...and was ignored> a 
>> travesty
>> that would see Labour gone)  the NRP is shafted so much more easily.
>>
>> The CSA destroys more kids futures than it saves (the serial shaggers are
>> free-to-roam if not working), real dads must make up the target 
>> totals.The
>> name is just spin-drift.
>>
>> Soon to be 3 (THREE!!!) systems which will penalise kids with dad-contact
>> differently...who cares...NOBODY.
>> So, Gordon is Autistic (yes, he is) but the loons before did no better 
>> and
>> does anybody seriously expect a sensible, strategic response?
>>
>> Best advice is|: get out of the UK: dads here are not ever (even if good
>> family men) above suspicion. This is the
>> 'Self-Fulfilling-Prophecy-Society'.....................sing along then!
>>
>> I wish I had a positive answer but if you are an NRP male in the UK then
>> any effort you make can be killed on a whim...hence the growing army 
>> (faster
>> than the elderly-care problem) of 'poor' Benefit Mummies (er..children in
>> poverty). You could weep eh...?
>>
>> So, do the Fletch: go by post and enclose evidence (photocopy SSP letters
>> etc) and say you are enclosing them in your main letter and do send a 
>> copy
>> to your MP with a 'help!' note and be persistent (your first MP reply 
>> will
>> be a brush-off)..go to their 'surgery' do 'em face-to face. They 
>> hope/expect
>> a squeal-and-quiet constituent. Being  not easily silenced and maybe a
>> nuisance will stir them into some sort of action (Smith, J...the 'Home

The original anti-CSA members in Plymouth have long gone, burnt out by 
sheer weight of people's problems. I think you'll have to search the 
'net for this now.

In article , 
fletcherhere@yahoo.co.uk says...
> Interesting that they not only steal the peoples money they steal their land 
> too!
> 
> Any more hard evidence available on this one, would like to promote this 
> issue.
> 
> "Me"  wrote in message 
> news:MPG.2294d3f86db0aeaf989723@news.tiscali.co.uk...
> >I had all the usual shit after splitting up from my wife. Gave her the
> > house "in full and final settlement". Along comes CSA and says "That
> > doesn't count". The split was friendly, so I took her off benefits for a
> > few months and she told the CSA to go fuck itself. She was only on
> > benefits for a few months after that, and the CSA have never been
> > involved since.
> >
> > With my recent ex, I have sucessfully got them to stop using the term
> > "parent with care" on the phone or in correspondance. After all, I am
> > NOT the "parent without care". And we have equal custody. And one of the
> > kids nominally lives with me (she's away at college).
> >
> > The only way to sort the CSA out is with a small tactical nuke. Totally
> > fucked up idea to begin with, and apparently staffed by Nazis and
> > Extremists. I do know that the Plymouth site was built illegally, on
> > land inside the National Park and that was donated "for the people of
> > Plymouth". Anyone got a spare bulldozer?
> >
> > In article <4829f310$1_3@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com>,
> > sponged@freeserve.co.uk says...
> >> Some advice..(and a diatribe..but hell..)
> >>
> >> Been here too and learned the hard way: no (NO..nowt) ie nothing at all 
> >> that
> >> the NRP pays counts for anything unless it is CSA sanctioned. If you 
> >> don't
> >> go through them then expect to be 'deadbeat dad' DOEd. Nothing you 
> >> say/pay
> >> counts (without evidence) anything she says counts unless you have 
> >> evidence
> >> to the contrary (and even then...). Fletcher is right: write,,,I have had 
> >> a
> >> good result from a phone call....but you depend upon getting through and 
> >> to
> >> the right person and establishing a rapport...and even then some t**t can
> >> undo it all and deny all knowledge.
> >>
> >> Of course it's sexist : most female MPs didn't get there because of
> >> intelligence/statesperson...B.  Castle, G. Dunwoody (hope sp. ok) 
> >> excepted.
> >> What really screwed all the systems was the Target Culture and minimum 
> >> wage

In article <54dc4e3f-afad-4c1d-9a1d-
99d7063293ae@m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>, greengenes2004@yahoo.co.uk 
says...
> On 14 May, 11:48, Me  wrote:
> >
> > I do know that the Plymouth site was built illegally, on
> > land inside the National Park and that was donated "for the people of
> > Plymouth". Anyone got a spare bulldozer?
> >
> I didn't know that.  Sorry I haven't got a spare bulldozer but, if I
> can find some dynamite, will that help?
> 
> Mr GG
> 
LOL! "If you see me running, try to keep up". :-D