KennyN

I've only ever leased one car, a Merc, due to the deal at the time and it made sense from a tax perspective. The car was looked after as if it was my own and I did around 2k more miles than the agreement allowed for, which I fully expected to pay for. At the end of the term, a guy arrived to inspect the car and take it away, he gave it a clean bill of health noting a few stone chips, but nothing excessive. I received post from Mercedes, which I expected to be an invoice for the additional mileage, but it was a nice letter saying that they were waiving the charge, as I had taken such good care of the car. It was a good experience and something I'd be happy to do again if the numbers make financial sense.

That works for me.

Excellent, I might need to confiscate my son's PS4 and relocate it to my office

Hi Paul, welcome to the forum. The later gear change mechanism is a significant step forward in my opinion, it does make shifting gear a much more positive process when pressing on. Whether it's a £10k improvement is debatable, but the extra outlay will also get you a newer car. Depending on how you plan on using the car, I'd say AC is a must if you are planning to daily the car, as the ventilation system is adequate at best and AC helps clear the screen if it's damp. If it is just a fair weather weekend toy, then you could get away without it, but I would have thought that it's an option most buyers would be looking for, unless they are in the market for a light as possible track car.

Having watched the video, I'd say bad luck, you did what you needed to do to avoid an accident. 10/10 for effort though, you were certainly trying Everyone walked away at the end of the day, that's the main thing!

Exactly and Tommy will be laps ahead, not seconds

I think it's only me that was unavailable on the 15th, so please pick a date that suits the majority, especially yourself Paul as the organiser.

Well done and happy birthday TLF!

22nd sounds good to me.

I agree and I feel for those who have been subjected to poor leadership and direction from those at the top of the business. My concern is that if the government throw whatever it takes to re-float the ship now then it's just shoring up a flawed business model that will ultimately fail if the profit margins no longer exist to make such a company viable. The money would be put to better use retraining those impacted, or helping them find new roles in the travel industry.

True, but for that section of the community walking upright is a recent development in their evolutionary path. They should be left to fend for themselves wherever their government handout managed to take them, it would lessen the drain on resources here. By savvy I meant seasoned travellers who actually understand the benefits of paying more with a decent airline and having adequate insurance to cover the eventualities should the worst happen.

Other than saving the livelihoods of those employed by Thomas Cook, why should the Government step in? When Thomas Cook were sitting pretty counting their profits in previous years and paying those at the top nice fat salaries did they give a second thought to the potential of tough times ahead? Isn't ATOL supposed to be the knight in shining armour in such cases, or is that just another ruse to charge more and make you feel warm and fuzzy whilst handing over your hard earned? I realise that above is all questions and no answers, but I fail to see why us taxpayers should foot the bill for what appears to be yet another case of poor strategy and lack of direction from those at the top. Regardless of where anyone sits on the topic of Brexit, I expect that Thomas Cook will be one of many that will conveniently blame Brexit for their demise. Sure, the internet is also a factor, as consumers have become more savvy they organise their own holidays, but that's the world we live in, it's a case of keep up or die in business.

If other commitments allow, I'll be there. I've been looking for an excuse to visit C&M for ages.

I had the same dilemma recently, the original Corsa rears were done, but the fronts still had a consistent 5mm left. I'm not usually a fan of mixing tyres, but with no Corsa rears available that I could find and after a bit of forum trawling/a chat with B&C, I decided to change the rears to PS4's and see how it felt, with the view of changing the fronts if it messed up the balance. So far, so good on road use running at the recommended 32/38 psi, it might be a different story on track, but for now I'm happy with not changing the fronts until they've seen a bit more action.

As others have said, the fronts are done, but for peace of mind, I would be changing the rears too before driving too far or fast.