Britain:Woman sucessfully sues dating agency for failing to find her a boyfriend


A British woman sucessfulluy sued a dating agency for failing to deliver her a boyfriend.

Tereza Burki, 47 was awared a $17,000 payout after an exclusize dating agency failed to find the man of her dreams, father of her child.

The mother of three forked out $16,000 for Seventy Thirty Ltd’s services.  She told the High Court the agency had told her it only dealt in “creme de la creme” matches and could introduce her to “bachelors you dream of meeting”

But despite having more than 7000 members, only 100 of them were men actively looking for love.

Judge Richard Parkes QC ordered the agency to repay Ms Burki’s fee — saying she had been “deceived” by Seventy Thirty’s then-managing director.

He told the court: “Gertrude Stein quipped that whoever said money can’t buy happiness didn’t know where to shop.”

Tereza Burki successfully sued a dating agency after it failed to find her love.
Tereza Burki successfully sued a dating agency after it failed to find her love.Picture: Supplied, Tereza Burki/Facebook.

This case is about a woman looking for romantic happiness who says she was tricked into shopping in the wrong place, paying a large sum to a dating which, she says, made promises but failed to produce the goods.”

The court was told Tereza signed up for the dating agency in 2014 looking for a wealthy man with “a lifestyle similar or more affluent than her own”.

The mother-of-three also wanted her new boyfriend to have “multiple residences” and be willing to provide her with another child.

Tereza, who lives in plush Lennox Gardens, Chelsea, said she “felt very let down and disappointed” that the agency’s claims were “untrue”.

Giving evidence, she said: “You shouldn’t promise people who are in a fragile state of mind, in their mid-40s, the man of their dreams.

“You are entrusting a service you believe is professional, who will take care of your interests and have your best interests at heart.”

As well as giving her money back, the judge awarded her $650.for the “disappointment and sadness” she suffered — bringing her total payout to $17,644.

BUT the mother was ordered to pay Seventy Thirty $6500.  in libel damages after writing a damning Google review of the agency where she branded it a “scam”.

Seventy Thirty Ltd said: “Ms Burki entered into membership with the wrong assumption about the number of potential gentlemen we would introduce her to.

“She assumed it would be like internet dating, but we are a niche, exclusive agency, not a mainstream, mass-market online dating service. We are not going to have thousands of members because there simply aren’t thousands of single, wealthy, high-calibre prospects out there.”

The Sun/UK

Advertisements

Indian billionaire’s daughter hires 12 servants to serve her at university


 

The staff will reportedly be paid about £30,000 a year.

(PTI)

An unnamed Indian billionaire’s daughter has been dubbed the “poshest” student in the UK after it was claimed that her family is hiring 12 staff members to help her during her studies at a Scottish university. The first-year student at the University of St Andrew on the east coast of Scotland will have a house manager, three housekeepers, a gardener, a lady’s maid and a butler on hand to help her, along with three footmen, a private chef and chauffeur, ‘The Sun’ newspaper reported

They will be employed at the family’s new luxurious mansion, bought so that the daughter won’t have to stay in general student accommodation during the four years she spends studying at the leading Scottish university.

An advert was placed a few months ago looking for “an outgoing, cheerful” maid with an energetic personality to work within the household.

According to the advert, the maid would be in charge of “waking principal up, liaising with other staff regarding routine and schedule (and) assisting with grooming.”

The staff will also be responsible for wardrobe management and personal shopping, the job requirement posted by recruitment agency Silver Swan said.

The butler will be in charge of the student’s staff, who will be expected to open doors for her whenever possible, and footmen will serve meals, lay the table and clean.

The “ultra high net worth (UHNW) family” are described as very formal who want experienced staff, the advert notes in reference to the various roles on offer, which are said to pay around 30,000 (34,000 us) pounds a year.

Bridezilla Apocalypse: The Nerve!!!


Related image

 

  I was recently invited to a destination wedding where the attendees were expected to buy expensive gifts .( A minimum of $500) Many guests declined including yours truly.  The Bride to be and her family didn’t believe their requests were excessive.

This trending story is beyond outrageous.  An extreme example of when the dream is way beyond reality. The bride wanted each guest to pay $1500, to attend her wedding,  When the guest refused the bride attacked.

To the groom, four words… run fast, run far…….

Click on the link below.   I am absolutely sure it will leave you saying WTF?

https://www.yahoo.com/style/worst-bride-ever-womans-expletive-laced-wedding-rant-takes-bridezilla-extreme-145910792.html

 

Denmark:Photo of Danish policewoman and Muslim hugging at demonstration goes viral


Photo of Danish policewoman and Muslim hugging at demonstration goes viral
Ayah, a wearer of the niqab, weeps as she is embraced by a police officer during a demonstration against the Danish face veil ban in Copenhagen. Photo: Andrew Kelly/Reuters/Ritzau Scanpix
A photo of a police officer hugging an emotional niqab-wearing woman at a demonstration in Denmark on Wednesday has become one of the country’s most widely-shared images this week.

 

The demonstration in Copenhagen’s Nørrebro neighbourhood on Wednesday took place as a new law banning public wearing of face-covering garments including Islamic veils came into effect.

During the demonstration, a 37-year-old woman named Ayah became emotional and was consoled by a police officer.

The embrace was captured by Reuters photographer Andrew Kelly and the story has since become the most viewed article on newspaper Politiken’s website, the newspaper wrote on Thursday.

Social media users also shared the moment widely.

“This picture tells you everything about the fantastic land we want to protect together. These two women are everything I believe in. Not the niqab or the uniform. But love for each other when others want to turn us against each other,” Niddal El-Jabri wrote on Twitter.

The woman in the photograph told Reuters prior to the demonstration that the law would limit her personal freedom.

“This is not the Denmark that we know. I can’t go out when I want to…I have kids, how do I pick them up from the bus and the school and the train?”, Ayah, who is reported to have requested her full name not be published due to threats, said.

“It’s just absurd. I can’t do the things I love to do any more. I can’t go to the museum and the beach, can’t go out and take photos. I’m just going to be a prisoner in my home. But I prefer to be a prisoner in my home to taking off my niqab,” she added.

The 37-year-old also spoke to Politiken after the photo was published.

“It was a very difficult day. We were very insecure, and we didn’t know what to expect. It was overwhelming. And then this dialogue police officer, as I call her, approached us to ask if we were okay and to offer us a drink of water,” she told the Danish newspaper, which took the unusual step of reporting the story in English.

“I told her that everything was fine. And I thought it was great that 3,000 people could march together peacefully,” she added.

She also said the policewoman told her she was personally against the law banning face-covering garments.

“To be honest, I can’t remember the exact sequence of events. But I recall that I was talking to her. And then suddenly I was crying. It was weird, because she was just being nice and friendly. She told me that she was personally against this law, even though she is a police officer,” the 37-year-old said.

“I had mixed emotions. On the one hand, this woman is being really friendly, but she is also a person who is entitled to fine me tomorrow when I leave my house,” she continued.

Similarly to niqabi women interviewed by The Local at Wednesday’s demonstration, Ayah said she would continue to wear the niqab despite the ban.

“I’m not bothering anyone, and I wasn’t a criminal yesterday. I will continue to wear my niqab as I always have. And then I guess I will have to isolate myself even more in my apartment. I’m not a millionaire, you know, so I can’t afford to pay the fines,” she told Politiken.

Italy: Beautiful seaside towns where tourists don’t tread


Santa Cesarea Terme on Puglia’s Adriatic coast boasts great beaches, explorable sea caves and naturally occurring hot springs.

        The seaside town of Sperlonga in south Lazio has been the getaway of choice for those in the know since antiquity. It’s easy to see why.

The resort of Stintino in northern Sardinia is an enchanting old fishing village home to some of the island’s best sandy beaches.

Termoli on Molise’s beautiful Adriatic coast is practically unknown outside Italy and a great place to go to avoid tourists!

Facing the Tyrrhenian Sea on the coast of Calabria the town of Tropea boasts, sun, sea, sand and everybody’s favourite spicy sausage – ‘Nduja!

The colorful town of Santa Margherita Ligure on the Ligurian riviera is the perfect place to spend a few peaceful days.

The stunning town of Bordighera on the Ligurian coast is where the Maritime Alps plunge into the sea.
The picture-postcard town of Cefalù in Sicily is home to unique Arab-Norman architecture, azzure waters and golden beaches.
The resting place of Renaissance master Caravaggio, Porto Ercole, on the southern coast of Tuscany offers secluded beaches and pristine waters.
The little-known town of Numana on the Adriatic coast of Marche is perfect for those seeking sea air and tranquility.
From The Local/Italy

Britain:Supreme Court rules woman in ‘loveless marriage’ cannot have a divorce and must stay married to husband


Tini Owens, who is in her late sixties, has been told she cannot divorce Hugh Owens, 78, despite claiming their marriage has broken down following an affair she had several years ago

‘Remarkable’ ruling demonstrates divorce laws are not fit for 21st century, say politicians and lawyers

 

The Supreme Court has ordered a woman to stay married to her husband of 40 years, rejecting her attempts to divorce him because the marriage is “loveless and has broken down”.

Tini Owens, 68, has been told she cannot divorce Hugh Owens, 78, despite claiming their marriage has broken down following an affair she had several years ago.

Politicians and legal experts said the “remarkable” ruling demonstrated that divorce laws were not fit for the 21st century and showed the need for “no fault” divorce, which forces couples to justify to the court why their marriage has broken down.

Supreme Court justices analysed rival legal arguments, which revolved around concepts of “unreasonable” behavior and “fault”, at a Supreme Court hearing in London in May and delivered a ruling on Wednesday.

One, Lord Wilson, said justices had ruled against Ms Owens “with reluctance”, saying the “question for parliament” was whether the law governing “entitlement to divorce” remained “satisfactory”.

Lord Wilson indicated that Ms Owens would be able to divorce in 2020, when the couple have been separated for five years.

Another, Supreme Court president Lady Hale, said she found the case “very troubling”, but she said it was not for judges to “change the law”.

The current law in England and Wales does not allow one spouse to unilaterally decide to divorce because they are in an unhappy marriage. Instead, the spouse that wishes to leave must allege “unreasonable behaviour” and give examples of this to the Court.

Alternatively, if they do not wish to apportion “blame” to the other spouse and there is no adultery, then they must wait two years where a divorce can be granted if both spouses consent to it.

If both spouses do not consent, then the spouse who wishes to divorce must be separated for five years from their spouse before being entitled to a divorce.

Richard Burgon MP, Labour’s shadow justice secretary, said the ruling underlined why the UK’s divorce laws needed to change urgently.

“Labour is committed to introducing no fault divorce proceedings. The Conservatives should stop denying people this basic right and immediately agree to do the same, so that our divorce laws are fit for the 21st century,” he said.

Emma Nash, associate at the International Family Law Group LLP, said: “The court’s decision is remarkable, particularly bearing in mind that Mrs Owens gave 27 examples of what she perceived to be unreasonable behaviour.

“This clearly highlights the need for reform in this area of the law and is an example of the need for ‘no fault’ divorce to be reconsidered by law makers.”

Katie Lowe, partner at leading law firm JMW Solicitors, said the ruling was one of the most significant family cases decided by the Supreme Court since it took over from the House of Lords in 2009.

“The result highlights the reality that desperately unhappy people can be forced to remain married for up to five extra years if they cannot find sufficiently ’strong’ examples of their spouse’s behaviour and there has been no adultery,” she said, adding: “The case has shone a light on our broken divorce law.”

Ms Owens has already lost two rounds of the legal battle since she petitioned for divorce in 2015 after moving out of their home in Broadway, Worcestershire.

In 2016, she failed to persuade a Family Court judge to allow her to divorce, and last year, three appeal judges ruled against her after a Court of Appeal hearing in London.

The judges said Ms Owens had failed to establish that her marriage had, legally, irretrievably broken down and dismissed her challenge to a ruling by Judge Robin Tolson.

Ms Owens’ lawyers said she should not have to prove that Mr Owens’ behaviour has been “unreasonable” – only that she should not “reasonably be expected” to remain with him.

Barrister Philip Marshall QC, who leads Ms Owens’ legal team, told Supreme Court justices that a “modest shift” of focus in interpretation of legislation was required.

But barrister Nigel Dyer QC, who leads her husband’s legal team, disagreed and raised concern about the introduction of divorce “on demand”

 

How white women use strategic tears to silence women of color


‘Often, when I have attempted to speak to or confront a white woman about something she has said or done that has impacted me adversely, I am met with tearful denials and indignant accusations that I am hurting her’
 ‘Often, when I have attempted to speak to or confront a white woman about something she has said or done that has impacted me adversely, I am met with tearful denials and indignant accusations that I am hurting her’ Photograph: Caro/Alamy

The legitimate grievances of brown and black women are no match for the accusations of a white damsel in distress

 

By: Ruby Hamad: The Guardian Uk

That the voices of “women of color” are getting louder and more influential is a testament less to the accommodations made by the dominant white culture and more to their own grit in a society that implicitly – and sometimes explicitly – wants them to fail.

At the Sydney writers’ festival on Sunday, editor of Djed Press, Hella Ibrahim, relayed the final minutes of a panel on diversity featuring writers from the western Sydney Sweatshop collective. One of the panelists, Winnie Dunn, in answering a question about the harm caused by good intentions, had used the words “white people” and “shit” in the same sentence. This raised the ire of a self-identified white woman in the audience who interrogated the panelists as to “what they think they have to gain” by insulting people who “want to read their stories.”

In other words, the woman saw a personal attack where there wasn’t one and decided to remind the panellists that as a member of the white majority she ultimately has their fate in her hands.

“I walked out of that panel frustrated,” Ibrahim wrote. “Because yet again, a good convo was derailed, white people centred themselves, and a POC panel was told to police it’s [sic] tone to make their message palatable to a white audience.”

Trauma assails brown and black women from all directions. There is the initial pain of being subjected to gendered racism and discrimination, there is the additional distress of not being believed or supported, and of having your words and your bravery seemingly credited to others.

And then there is a type of trauma inflicted on women of color that many of us find among the hardest to disclose, the one that few seem willing to admit really happens because it is so thoroughly normalized most people refuse to see it.

It is what that writers’ festival audience member was demonstrating, and what blogger and author Luvvie Ajayi called the “weary weaponising of white women’s tears”.

To put it less poetically, it is the trauma caused by the tactic many white women employ to muster sympathy and avoid accountability, by turning the tables and accusing their accuser.

Almost every BW (black woman) I know has a story about a time in a professional setting in which she attempted to have a talk with a WW about her behavior & it has ended with the WW (white woman) crying,” one black woman wrote on Twitter. “The WW wasn’t crying because she felt sorry and was deeply remorseful. The WW was crying because she felt “bullied” and/or that the BW was being too harsh with her.”

When I shared these tweets on my Facebook page asking brown and black women if this had ever happened to them, I was taken by how deeply this resonated, prompting one Arab woman to share this story:

A WW kept touching my hair. Pulling my curls to watch them bounce back. Rubbing the top. Smelling it. So when I told her to stop and complained to HR and my supervisor, she complained that I wasn’t a people person or team member and I had to leave that position for being ‘threatening’ to a coworker.”

For the doubters, here is a mild version of this sleight-of-hand in action:

Pinterest
Jully Black and Jeanne Beker

Notice it is the white woman – Jeanne Beker – who first interrupts the black woman – Jully Black – who takes the interruption in her stride. Black continues to speak passionately and confidently, which Beker interprets as a personal attack on her even though Black is clearly talking in general terms (just as Winnie Dunn was). Beker then attempts to shut Black down by essentially branding her a bully.

Had Jully Black not stopped and repeated Jeanne Beker’s words back at her – “Why are you attacking me?” – they would have passed largely unnoticed, just another woman of colour smeared as an aggressor for daring to continue speaking when a white woman wanted her to stop.

It doesn’t usually end this way. “White women tears are especially potent … because they are attached to the symbol of femininity,” Ajayi explains. “These tears are pouring out from the eyes of the one chosen to be the prototype of womanhood; the woman who has been painted as helpless against the whims of the world. The one who gets the most protection in a world that does a shitty job overall of cherishing women.”

As I look back over my adult life a pattern emerges. Often, when I have attempted to speak to or confront a white woman about something she has said or done that has impacted me adversely, I am met with tearful denials and indignant accusations that I am hurting her. My confidence diminished and second-guessing myself, I either flare up in frustration at not being heard (which only seems to prove her point) or I back down immediately, apologizing and consoling the very person causing me harm.

It is not weakness or guilt that compels me to capitulate. Rather, as I recently wrote, it is the manufactured reputation Arabs have for being threatening and aggressive that follows us everywhere. In a society that routinely places imaginary “wide-eyed, angry and Middle Eastern” people at the scenes of violent crimes they did not commit, having a legitimate grievance is no match for the strategic tears of a white damsel in distress whose innocence is taken for granted.

“We talk about toxic masculinity,” Ajayi warns, “but there is (also) toxicity in wielding femininity in this way.” Brown and black women know we are, as musician Miss Blanks writes, “imperfect victims”. That doesn’t mean we are always in the right but it does mean we know that against a white woman’s accusations, our perspectives will almost always go unheard either way.

Whether angry or calm, shouting or pleading, we are still perceived as the aggressors.

Likewise, white women are equally aware their race privileges them as surely as ours condemns us. In this context, their tearful displays are a form of emotional and psychological violence that reinforce the very system of white dominance that many white women claim to oppose.

Ruby Hamad is a journalist and PhD candidate at the University of New South Wales, Australia.