Are the Nisa ones own-branded ? Tesco (online) do indeed seem to want £1.54 for a tin, which they claim is Aldi price-matched, but that’s for the Old El Paso ones. Co-op (who, I think, own Nisa) want £1.65 for those Old El Paso Refried Beans 435g - Co-op. I guess someone has to pay OEP’s ‘big corporate’ advertising costs etc …
1 Like
The plot thickens 
1 Like
Time for a frequent flyer in all senses.
Yellow+green=beige.
Coldplay… The new U2.
Anyone got a seat for me hat?
This cunt can have a jab to the crown jewels. It’s October ffs.
Edit: just realised that he’s probably lit up his gaffe for Diwali. Still deserves a cockpunch for reasons of bad taste.
2 Likes
One of my neighbours does this, people drive by slowly to look at the show… Fucking annoying.
2 Likes
You’re only annoyed cos the lights sparkle on your hifi crystals and make you see spots Bob
1 Like
Supermassive cockpunch of hate and death to whatever idiot 15YO has decided that Radio 3 and 6 Music should be infected with ever-more talk, chit-chat, interviews and general mouth-sturbation instead of playing some Actual Fucking Music! 
Meanwhile, announcement that Radio 4 is going to have music programs…
Utterly, UTTERLY clueless BBC 
4 Likes
Some balm for your BBC angst
4 Likes
Ooh, thanks for that, followed!
1 Like
Better Times, thanks mate 
1 Like
Mrs M will be apoplectic
1 Like
2 Likes
Putting up unsafe buildings then trying to claw back the cost of repairs. Cunts.
Thousands of affordable UK homes ‘won’t be built because of safety crisis’ | Construction industry | The Guardian?
1 Like
5 Likes
They don’t build affordable fucking homes anyway.
3 Likes
I’m a bit confused by all the things going on in that article. The main thrust seems to be that housing associations are having to divert resource which, because they’re not-for-profit and largely responsible for social housing, is mostly public money. They are trying to get more money from government (is that the ‘clawing back’ you meant ?) but that’s really their only way of both continuing to build new social stock and also sorting out the fire problems.
The cunts are the insulation people who lied that their material was safe and the private developers that cut safety corners. But I don’t think either of them is trying to claw any money back.
There is a separate problem, also covered in the article, with non-social housing where private leaseholders are being stung for fire repair work. That seems unfair as they weren’t at all responsible for the poor construction. I can understand why they’re trying to get the money from someone else too. But I can see that between some freeholders simply not having that money (they’d go bankrupt) and/or the builders having gone out of business or otherwise escaped responsibility, the government’s building safety fund looks like an obvious target. Obviously where whoever was originally responsible can still cover the cost, they absolutely should.
Whoever decided to close the M4 between Hungerford and Newbury over the weekend. added over an hour to the trip back from Bath.