r/Glasgow Tools

Red_Brummy

Reddit URLhttps://www.reddit.com/user/Red_Brummy
Last 12 monthsTotalDeletedRemoved
r/Glasgow posts702
r/glasgow comments9300

Interests:

  • Our pals bought a place where Hacking & Paterson were factors and had such a disappointing experience with their incompetence, that they organised a vote with the majority of flat owners and booted them. by Red_Brummy (Tue 1st Sep 2020 10:15am)
  • As a parent with a screaming brat on occasion, I would be looking for places to take the bairn with room for a pram, changing facilities in a toilet and a well priced menu. If you want to avoid us, find a place without those things! by Red_Brummy (Sun 8th Nov 2020 11:02am)
  • At the moment where? by Red_Brummy (Tue 1st Dec 2020 10:49pm)
  • That's not a nice thing to say. Some of them only have 2 legs. by Red_Brummy (Thu 3rd Dec 2020 11:33pm)
  • Some great answers in here but just to confirm the terminology as per [The Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings](https://www.spab.org.uk/advice/roughcast): >Roughcast (also called ‘wet-dash’ in Cumbria and ‘harling’ in Scotland) is a render with a coarse finishing coat containing gravel thrown in a premixed state onto a wall. It is distinct from pebble dash (or ‘dry dash’) in which the aggregate is applied separately onto wet plaster. Historically, roughcast was popular for rural buildings across much of the UK, except the south-eastern half of England. It was also sometimes employed for high status Arts and Crafts buildings. >Compared to smooth render, roughcast is particularly advantageous in exposed districts because its heavy texture creates a larger surface area that aids moisture absorption and evaporation. Additionally, the application method allows use of a mortar mix less prone to shrinkage while curing. Roughcast / Wet-Dash / Harling = render with the gravel in it. Pebble Dash = gravel thrown (dashed) onto the wet render. OP, as to your query, if the Roughcast / Pebble Dash is sound, and has not bossed (come away from the sub-strate - you can tell this if it has cracked, or if you knock on it, it sounds hollow), then the best way to renovate it is to paint over. There are a few contemporary examples of renovated or new roughcast / pebble dashed buildings out there if you need inspiration: [One](https://www.dezeen.com/2019/10/17/david-leech-architects-house-dublin-ireland/) [Two](https://www.archdaily.com/324286/4-house-taka) - incidentally both are from Ireland. by Red_Brummy (Wed 23rd Dec 2020 2:51pm)
  • That looks less Mackintosh and more De Stijl. by Red_Brummy (Fri 29th Jan 2021 10:18am)
  • Alex Cairnie is moving onto filming women now? Normally it is just "foreign" bearded manly men types he accused of starting on him or looking at him shifty while they hold a bag of toilet paper. by Red_Brummy (Thu 11th Feb 2021 1:40pm)
  • One difference re Liverpool is that Klopp made multiple public appearances to ask fans to stay away. Of course, the fannies still turned up, but in fewer numbers than may normally have been expected. by Red_Brummy (Mon 8th Mar 2021 12:19pm)
  • What about the thousands of fannies who did not help and instead trashed the place? by Red_Brummy (Mon 8th Mar 2021 12:16pm)
  • Fannies. A large bunch in the Meadows in Edinburgh as well. Equally fannies. by Red_Brummy (Wed 17th Mar 2021 10:05pm)
  • It depends on how extensive you want to redecorate and what the property is Listed for. C-Listing generally, but not always, implies that the exterior is of importance, B and always A include the interior. Firstly, I would find the listed description on [Historic Environment Scotland](https://www.historicenvironment.scot/advice-and-support/listing-scheduling-and-designations/listed-buildings/search-for-a-listed-building/). It should be simple enough to find it via map or address. Then read the description of whh the building has been listed. If it mentions anything specific about the interior, perhaps ornate plaster work or joinery as the other User suggested, then there is a good chance you will need Listed Building Consent for internal works. Worth noting this application is free though - so you just need to stick with the Local Authority paperwork and timeline if you are going down that route. Alternatively, if the listing makes no reference to the interior, or you are talking about a simple paint and wallpaper job, then you may feel happy just to go for it. by Red_Brummy (Mon 5th Apr 2021 10:50pm)
  • Erm, I don't think you are quite correct there. You may be conflating two different but interlinked topics. One is the Listing of a building, which is determined by HES, the other is an application for Listed Building Consent which is made to the Local Authority (Council) who will then consult with HES as part of the application. by Red_Brummy (Mon 5th Apr 2021 11:07pm)
  • The latter point is not quite correct - you need to apply for Conservation Area Consent in order to carry out those works. Again that is a free application to the Council but bear in mind not all window solutions will be acceptable - uPVC windows on a main public thoroughfare of a listed building will likely be refused. by Red_Brummy (Tue 6th Apr 2021 10:53pm)
  • Amazing view of steetlights at night? I suppose if that floats your boat. by Red_Brummy (Fri 9th Apr 2021 11:03am)
  • This is awesome. Are you going to print it on a mat / carpet? Never mind, just saw you have shared a link. by Red_Brummy (Tue 13th Apr 2021 9:25am)
  • Found the neckbeard. by Red_Brummy (Thu 6th May 2021 9:22pm)
  • "Oh this is just the SNP demonising innocent hard working class football fans." Fecking embarrassing scum. by Red_Brummy (Sat 29th May 2021 5:55pm)
  • Ooft. What a mad bint. by Red_Brummy (Mon 31st May 2021 5:47pm)
  • Terribly tragic news. by Red_Brummy (Mon 14th Jun 2021 11:52am)
  • Thing is, the national policy is once staff have asked - then you have provide ID no matter the age. Ignoring your personal circumstances, and replace it with a scenario on a Friday night in the scheme and then imagine how many 18 year olds go in to try and buy booze for teenagers. Far better to ask for ID and cover all bases. by Red_Brummy (Thu 1st Jul 2021 7:44pm)
  • >HUNGRY children queueing at a local soup kitchen to receive hot dinners on a school night has prompted a call for party leaders to attend the provision and “make a difference”. >Organisers from Homeless Project Scotland say they were left “heartbroken” after two schoolkids attended their city centre facility for food on Tuesday evening. >The children, who were “extremely grateful to receive their meals” are described as being between seven and eight-years-old. >It is the first time adolescents have used the charity’s service – which has been running from underneath the Hielanman’s Umbrella for almost one year. >Colin McInnes, who is the chairman at Homeless Project Scotland, said: “The queue was much bigger than normal on Tuesday night – there were around 130 people there. >“I started to see someone trying to push through the queue which obviously isn’t allowed to it caught our attention. It looked as though someone was trying to push their way down the middle. >“Eventually, it came to the front of the queue and my heart just completely sank. It was two kids aged around seven or eight.” >Volunteers swiftly handed over meal tickets to the youths before they sat down with their mother to eat their dinner. >Colin added: “They were excited and extremely grateful to receive their meals. You could tell they were hungry. >“They were skipping and saying, “oh my goodness, look at all of this food.” >“They couldn’t take the tickets from my hands fast enough. I’m a 6’2 grown man and it hit me hard – I had to take a minute away because I couldn’t watch children collect food on the streets of Glasgow. >“It left us heartbroken.” >Now, Colin hopes that leaders from each of the city’s political parties can attend the soup kitchen “to see first-hand” hardships currently faced by families in Glasgow. >“It is so sad that in this day and age in Glasgow there are children on the streets queueing on a school night for some hot food. >“I think it is time our local representatives came to our soup kitchen to see first-hand the struggles the people of Glasgow are facing. >“That way, they might be inclined to do something about it and try to make a difference. >“We have sent out written invitations in the past to all leaders of all parties, but we have had no response. >“I will be extending that written invitation once again. It is important that the public know what is happening in this city.” >The Argyle Street unit - which once ran every Friday evening - now operates three times per week to reflect demand. >On average, volunteers distribute around 1300 meals to those in need every seven days. by Red_Brummy (Fri 3rd Sep 2021 9:28am)
  • Get the train to Ardlui, walk to Falls of Falloch via WHW and on the way back pop into the Drovers for a few pints. by Red_Brummy (Sun 19th Sep 2021 1:29pm)
  • Hopefully that is shared with the bobbies. by Red_Brummy (Sun 17th Oct 2021 8:22pm)
  • You are an utterly ignorant melt. You could not be more ignorant even if you were a Tory voting Brexiteer. by Red_Brummy (Mon 18th Oct 2021 8:16am)
  • That is a lot of spurious claims. Not sure how useful it is sharing it without any evidence and just days after a murder of a bairn. by Red_Brummy (Mon 18th Oct 2021 8:33am)
  • Good to see quick and effective action after the horrible incident. Hopefully some sort of good can come from this - better education on knife crime perhaps. by Red_Brummy (Mon 18th Oct 2021 10:06am)
  • That will be an awesome gig. Great job OP. by Red_Brummy (Mon 18th Oct 2021 11:18pm)
  • If you don't know the truth, why spread apparent rumours? by Red_Brummy (Wed 20th Oct 2021 9:19am)
  • Apologies for the link. But this story seems to back up what some commentators had noted previously. by Red_Brummy (Thu 21st Oct 2021 8:46am)
  • [Always best to include the source when quoting.](https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/murder-victim-justin-mclaughlin-facing-25261493) by Red_Brummy (Thu 21st Oct 2021 8:45am)
  • >This article doesn’t even mention the kid him and his mates put in a coma the previous day. That's because it has been reported the events are unconnected. by Red_Brummy (Thu 21st Oct 2021 10:37am)
  • Fit? by Red_Brummy (Thu 21st Oct 2021 2:04pm)
  • >And I was right. On what exactly? You are still an ignorant melt with your assumptions. There are no apologies for you, you plum. >His parents are a disgrace for letting him get into that lifestyle of being a wee dick head and fight with other wee dick heads. by Red_Brummy (Thu 21st Oct 2021 5:22pm)
  • Assumptions. And you are a melt. by Red_Brummy (Thu 21st Oct 2021 5:47pm)
  • Yeah. That does not contribute to any debate beyond proving you are an ignorant melt. by Red_Brummy (Fri 22nd Oct 2021 8:53am)
  • Yep. by Red_Brummy (Fri 22nd Oct 2021 11:42am)
  • > I'm in favour of restrictions when it comes to buildings of actual cultural significance Well then the A Listed Egyptian Halls which has the same (equivalent) listing as the Liver building, for example, falls into that category. by Red_Brummy (Fri 22nd Oct 2021 11:42am)
  • The owner of the building, Derek Souter, pops up every time there is a negative article on this building on [Urban Realm](https://www.urbanrealm.com/news/8514/Egyptian_Halls_owner_raises_fears_of_potential_structural_collapse.html). He really needs to get telt like the silly wee bairn he is, get the building removed from his grubby hands and put into the ownership / custody of a group with the will and funding to carry out the works. by Red_Brummy (Fri 22nd Oct 2021 11:40am)
  • Which one? by Red_Brummy (Fri 22nd Oct 2021 12:39pm)
  • I would have thought it was pretty obvious that a) you are wrong and b) the various Listing Bodies confirm you are wrong. But there you go. by Red_Brummy (Fri 22nd Oct 2021 1:56pm)
  • Your opinion is wrong. That's it really in a nutshell. by Red_Brummy (Fri 22nd Oct 2021 4:45pm)
  • Love it. Drivers sitting in traffic moaning about other drivers sitting in traffic causing queues. by Red_Brummy (Mon 1st Nov 2021 5:06pm)
  • Is this serious? They need to get some of the "Pull the Pin" gin that was released - that would work well. by Red_Brummy (Sun 14th Nov 2021 1:51pm)
  • Hopefully you don't get confused by the BLATANTLY LYING Estate Agents and where they are marketing properties. by Red_Brummy (Thu 18th Nov 2021 12:19pm)
  • Who knows. I mean, I would advocate searching using a map but it looks like you already know your areas. by Red_Brummy (Thu 18th Nov 2021 1:20pm)
  • Old Firm Da's. Is anyone surprised? by Red_Brummy (Sat 1st Jan 2022 10:00pm)
  • He looks like the definition of a melt. by Red_Brummy (Mon 21st Feb 2022 4:16pm)
  • Not sure how many goats there are, but there are plenty of donkeys at Firhill on every other Saturday. by Red_Brummy (Mon 7th Mar 2022 1:43pm)
  • >Your dog is your responsibility, and you're legally obliged to keep it under control. Just to emphasise this point. In Scots Law it specifically mentions under control "by whatever means necessary". So for the majority of people that is via leash. For others, it could be a muzzle, long line, short line, retractable lead, walking to heel etc. I personally have noticed a change in behaviour both in people and in dogs since Covid restrictions started. For me, I started to keep the dog on the leash a lot more as the local paths and shared ways become much busier as people enjoyed a daily outing. I did not mind that at all as it is about respect and seeing more people out being healthy is only a good thing. But a negative effect is that as we did not have people around for months at a time, and then only in the garden, is that our dog's behaviour around people and possessions and other dogs has changed. It is hard to judge how they will react in circumstances which only a few years ago he would be relaxed and calm. It's a real shame, and we can work on it, but in the meantime as a responsible dog owner, I concur with everything that you are saying. >If you're lucky enough, and disciplined enough, to have a dog that will stick by your side and follow your commands when off the lead in a public place, good for you. If not, keep your dog on a bloody lead. by Red_Brummy (Tue 21st Jun 2022 10:57pm)
  • Prosecutor McGowan later added: >This is not the first time I have felt disappointment when reaching into a man's breeks, and I doubt it will be the last. by Red_Brummy (Thu 15th Dec 2022 11:12pm)
  • His mouth is well small in comparison to his foreheed. by Red_Brummy (Thu 16th Feb 2023 9:09pm)
  • I enjoy the Gaikit acronym. by Red_Brummy (Mon 27th Mar 2023 5:38pm)
  • Bombskare posted about it. Gutted. by Red_Brummy (Thu 30th Mar 2023 1:13pm)
  • Classic ignorant car drivers parking illegally. by Red_Brummy (Sun 9th Apr 2023 8:34pm)
  • How hot do you serve gazpacho? by Red_Brummy (Fri 14th Apr 2023 7:33pm)
  • Yeah. It is fucking odd blaming the victim instead of the Contractor who is entirely responsible for not securing their own site they have under their possession. by Red_Brummy (Fri 14th Apr 2023 7:44pm)
  • It is entirely the Contractor's fault - they did not secure the site despite repeated entries according to OP. And yes, they need to take whatever means necessary to protect the site as it is under their possession and the insurance company providing their cover will dictate that. Jeezo, so many people in this thread have no idea about construction and instead blame the victims. by Red_Brummy (Fri 14th Apr 2023 7:43pm)
  • The Contractor does not have possession of the roads you tit. The Contractor does have possession of the site and their insurances should cover this. by Red_Brummy (Fri 14th Apr 2023 7:41pm)
  • OP, you are missing a crucial part to the story - the site was not secure. If this happened repeatedly, as you have stated, then questions need to be asked of the Contractors how and why they managed to get in the site. I have worked in construction for decades now and have worked on many urban sites in areas with equal reputation. Without fail, if there was a breach of the site by an unauthorised person(s) then the Contractor would be answerable as they have taken ownership of the site and their insurances would need to take account of said breach. They may provide additional deterrents, more secure hoarding, CCTV, dogs, security daleks etc. But in this case, from what you are saying, this did not happen. Why not? That is the question that should be asked, not some victim blaming pish because you did not like the brats. by Red_Brummy (Fri 14th Apr 2023 7:39pm)
  • 100% correct. The amount of victim blaming in this thread and lack of understanding of Contract law is worrying. by Red_Brummy (Fri 14th Apr 2023 7:47pm)
  • You have failed on basic Contract Law. by Red_Brummy (Fri 14th Apr 2023 8:33pm)
  • Again. You have failed basic Contract Law. You actually have no idea what you are typing about, I have explained very clearly above what the Contractor has to do under Contract Law. And they are entirely negligent and have accepted responsibility. There is nothing else to say. by Red_Brummy (Fri 14th Apr 2023 8:58pm)
  • The Contractors lost the court case and accepted liability. You have also lost. by Red_Brummy (Fri 14th Apr 2023 10:20pm)
  • Oh man, you are actually dense. You still don't get this very simple piece of Contract Law. Let me try and explain it to you as I would to a bairn: * When a Contractor signs a contract for a building project, they take possession (ownership) of the site. From that moment, they need to have the insurances in place, including the necessary public liability insurance. As do the design team and employer. * At that moment of possession, the Contractor has a Duty of Care that extends to all members of the public that may be impacted by the works. * In most situations, the Contractor should have carried out a risk assessment of the site location and context and determined what security elements may need to be employed; be that hoarding, dogs, patrols, CCTV towers, security daleks etc. * In addition, there should have been a risk assessment carried out to the site's proximity to a playground, where, bairns would likely play. * Now, in this case, OP has said that they **repeatedly** saw the brats break into the site. If that is correct, then the Contractor has a) not secured the site and b) not remedied the situation. * The Contractor has accepted full liability for not securing the site. So, just to confirm. The Contractors are at fault. They have admitted fault. The site was not secure initially nor was it made secure after repeated breaches of it. The Contractors admitted that. And just to clarify, a public road is different from a private site under possession by a Contractor. If you cannot see that, then no one can help you. by Red_Brummy (Sat 15th Apr 2023 10:17am)
  • Copying off Google aye? You ignorant prick - I have decades of experience in the construction industry. Sit down. You clearly know nothing. So many victim blamers here, it is pathetic. by Red_Brummy (Sat 15th Apr 2023 3:28pm)
  • The irony of you who does not understand simple Contract Law trying to tell anyone else how to read. You pathetic victim blamer - I bet you are a Ranger's fan. by Red_Brummy (Sat 15th Apr 2023 7:10pm)
  • You have no point. Just stop blaming the victim - a bairn has died here you ignorant pleb. by Red_Brummy (Sat 15th Apr 2023 7:42pm)
  • Boom. by Red_Brummy (Thu 15th Jun 2023 2:19pm)
  • >Doesn’t “payment on fitting” mean to pay on the day of the fitting? Yes. And even then you should normally have a few days / weeks grace to pay and on top of that I would always negotiate holding something back in case of defects. Paying 50% up front is a huge red flag to be honest, so I would definitely not pay them before the work has even been completed. by Red_Brummy (Mon 14th Aug 2023 2:05pm)
  • It's sound deadening. In the past they used to use ash and sand. Nowadays, they use a rubber or bitumen type product. It's completely normal. by Red_Brummy (Thu 24th Aug 2023 8:49pm)
  • What is up with dodgy bagel companies in the Central Belt? by Red_Brummy (Tue 12th Sep 2023 7:26pm)
  • You have a 4x4 don't you? by Red_Brummy (Wed 13th Sep 2023 8:26pm)
  • Take the bus. by Red_Brummy (Sat 18th Nov 2023 2:00pm)
  • When a Contractor takes possession of a site they are legally in charge of securing it. The fact this site was breached multiple times prior to the incident, the fact the Contractor did not secure the site in response to previous breaches and the fact the Contractor has admitted they were at fault really means they are 100% to blame. I appreciate many people without bairns want to blame the parent here, but you are factually and legally wrong. by Red_Brummy (Mon 4th Dec 2023 12:32am)
  • >Talking absolute shite. I believe you are. Yes. Agreed. >If that wee guy wasn't breaking the law - which is there for a reason - he'd still be alive. If the Contractor had secured the site - which is their legal responsibility - and had secured the site further to multiple breaches of the same site - which is their legal responsibility - he'd still be alive. The Contractor has admitted fault. They are to blame. by Red_Brummy (Mon 4th Dec 2023 8:50am)
  • >"Secure a site" is a lot of shite, really. It's not. It's a legal requirement for a Contractor, really. Seriously you need to step away as you are typing absolute nonsense. by Red_Brummy (Mon 4th Dec 2023 8:59am)
  • Who even are you? And why are you joining the other ignorant numpties who have no idea about the Construction Industry? by Red_Brummy (Mon 4th Dec 2023 1:44pm)
  • >50 year in it Rid Dummy. Belter. You have probably never left your Ma's cellar you wee bairn. by Red_Brummy (Mon 4th Dec 2023 1:51pm)
  • A supposed half a century working on site and have no idea about a Contractor taking possession of a site. You are brilliant. by Red_Brummy (Mon 4th Dec 2023 2:03pm)
  • >People dont take any responsibility for anything these days... The Contractors have admitted breaching health and safety laws. by Red_Brummy (Mon 4th Dec 2023 2:09pm)
  • >I take it you missed my first comment on this ya fanny. I take it you can't follow a conversation on Reddit? >No construction site will stop a child entering even with 10 foot electrified Heras fencing. Yes. Yes they will. Unless you are saying there are 10's of kids killed every day in Scotland on construction sites? Because that is just utter bollocks and completely explains how ignorant you are. I really do hope you have not got half a century of experience on site as I would be concerned about the site security if you are this incompetent. by Red_Brummy (Mon 4th Dec 2023 2:08pm)
  • >Nice plank of wood to jack it and in you go to have a wonderful time. And hence the site is not secure. Well done for proving my point you plum. 50 years on site, belter. by Red_Brummy (Mon 4th Dec 2023 2:12pm)
  • Haha. A plasterer / night security team member with 50 years of experience of working on site who does not know about Contractor's obligations under Health and Safety laws. This gets worse with each of your replies. by Red_Brummy (Mon 4th Dec 2023 2:19pm)
  • >20 night security driving doing laps, still children were playing. Not very good night security then are you! Jeezo, this gets worse. Your incompetence is astounding! Wow. by Red_Brummy (Mon 4th Dec 2023 2:17pm)
  • >I'm not security Rid Dummy. I would hope not considering how incompetent you are. by Red_Brummy (Mon 4th Dec 2023 2:23pm)
  • >Aye, I made up a job about being a fucking plasterer. Knackered knees, humped shoulder and a trapped nerve in my neck. Yes, let's make it up lol. Great. You admitted it. Your incompetence knows no bounds. by Red_Brummy (Mon 4th Dec 2023 2:29pm)
  • What has your made up job got to do with anything? You are barely coherent in typing, no one believes your lies about working on sites for half a century, especially when you have no idea about H&S laws. Silly goose. by Red_Brummy (Mon 4th Dec 2023 2:25pm)
  • You don't know health and safety laws in relation to construction sites do you? by Red_Brummy (Mon 4th Dec 2023 2:30pm)
  • Because the sites are secure. Noted. by Red_Brummy (Mon 4th Dec 2023 3:12pm)
  • Yes. Not breaking into secure construction sites as they are secure. by Red_Brummy (Mon 4th Dec 2023 3:14pm)
  • Yep. That's right. Which is why the Contractor has admitted liability for breaching Health and Safety laws. by Red_Brummy (Mon 4th Dec 2023 4:35pm)
  • How many people within Scotland make £38K? It is mad. The Blue Tories are screwing so many people over just to make the country fail and stutter so much that they can screw more people over. Then leave the mess behind to the Red Tories to rinse and repeat. Just imagine looking at your bairn in their eyes and telling them with a straight face that yes, D.Ross and his Westminster paymasters are the ones to lead them. by Red_Brummy (Wed 6th Dec 2023 9:16am)
  • Has the couple rule been implemented? by Red_Brummy (Wed 6th Dec 2023 10:10am)