Latest news with #Enoch
Sky News
10-07-2025
- Business
- Sky News
Money Problem: 'I'm in a dispute with TK Maxx about a delivery - who is right?'
Every week, we get an expert to answer your financial problems or consumer disputes. Today, reader Enoch asks... "I made an online order totalling £135 at TK Maxx. I received a notification stating parcel delivered - it hadn't. I contacted the retailer and they insisted parcel had been delivered because the courier was in the vicinity of my address. The retailer asked me to chase it up with Royal Mail. They said the courier could not remember where parcel was delivered. TK Maxx has a picture of the parcel delivered at an address. The picture is not my door but are still refusing to refund my money." Thank you for your question - though, frustratingly, your message didn't include contact details so we couldn't get the information we need to go to TK Maxx for specifics. That leaves us with only your side of the story - but we can still outline people's rights when things like this happen. Your contract is always with the retailer, not the courier firm, to ensure that your order is safely delivered, Dixon says. If it hasn't turned up, the first thing you need to do is to contact the retailer. "It is their legal responsibility to make sure the item is safely delivered to you under the Consumer Rights Act 2015. They should contact the courier - who they've entered a contract with - and let you know what has happened to your item. "S29 (2) of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 states the goods remain at the trader's risk until they come into the physical possession of the consumer, or a person identified by the consumer, to take possession of the goods." The retailer can either refund you or rearrange for the goods to be delivered, he says. If this doesn't work, raise a chargeback with your bank or credit card provider within 120 days of your purchase or payment to get a refund. "You need to push hard on chargebacks and cite 'breach of contract' under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, as chargebacks are often rejected on the first attempt," he says. "Your bank or credit card provider will reverse the payment and give the retailer an opportunity to present their case. "Retailers don't like dealing with chargebacks as they are problematic and costly to resolve." If your item was bought for between £100.01 and £30,000 and you paid on credit card, you also have Section 75 rights... What if you leave delivery instructions? This could see you lose all rights. Dixon explains: "If you give specific instructions to the retailer for the item to be left in the porch, 'leave in shed at rear' or another designated safe place, and it is stolen, then you are responsible because the retailer and courier have simply followed your instructions." Returns You have a 14-day cooling-off period for all non-bespoke items under the Consumer Contracts Regulations 2013. Dixon says: "A retailer will usually provide a returns label or a website link to their returns policy, and give instructions for you to return goods. Usually a retailer will engage a courier firm for returns - be it Royal Mail, DHL etc etc." This often involves dropping the item off at a local convenience store, where labels are scanned. "Convenience stores often say you will get a receipt by email. This isn't always the case, leaving you high and dry if the goods go missing in transit," he warns. To protect yourself, Dixon says you should follow the policy courier firms use when they deliver goods to you: take a photo of the goods at the point of handover and insist on a receipt. "This is your proof if you need to dispute lost goods in transit," he says. "The retailer will push back in these cases when goods are lost in transit with a fob off saying it's not their fault and the responsibility lies with the courier, which is blatantly untrue." Dixon says the retailer engaged the courier firm to safely return the goods and the Consumer Rights Act 2015 applies. "Remember, your contract is with the retailer - you're following their return instructions. So this is on them. "You need to push hard on this and cite 'breach of contract' under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 to get a full refund. "If you hit a brick wall, simply raise a chargeback with your bank or credit card provider and cite 'breach of contract' under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 to dispute the transaction." As a last resort you can take your case to the Small Claims Court in England and Wales - or use the respective legal routes in Scotland and Northern Ireland. What if a company doesn't provide specific returns instructions? Your contract is then with the courier - but much of the above still applies with them. S49 Consumer Rights Act 2015 states that every contract to supply a service is to be treated as including a term that the trader must perform the service with reasonable care and skill. This feature is not intended as financial advice - the aim is to give an overview of the things you should think about.
The Advertiser
03-07-2025
- Entertainment
- The Advertiser
Duo axed from international exhibition receive apology
An artistic duo who were axed and then reinstated as Australia's picks for one of the world's most prestigious exhibitions have received an apology. The head of the nation's arts body, Wesley Enoch, said artist Khaled Sabsabi's artwork had been mischaracterised and he apologised to him and curator Michael Dagostino. The apology from Creative Australia's acting chair came after it was revealed on Wednesday that the pair will once again represent Australia at the 2026 Venice Biennale, after being dropped in February. "I want to apologise to them for the hurt and pain they've gone through in this process," Mr Enoch told ABC radio, while noting that he had already offered an in-person apology. "Although we will be stronger as a sector because of it, I know it's come at a personal cost - not just to them but also to a whole range of people in the arts sector. "We, as Creative Australia, need to help the whole sector learn some of these lessons going forward." The body initially revoked the pair's invitation after a federal politician raised concerns over Sabsabi's early works, one of which showed Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and another that depicted the 9/11 attacks. Creative Australia had claimed Sabsabi and Dagostino's selection would cause a prolonged and divisive debate and that it would pose an unacceptable risk to public support for the Australian artistic community, leading to the decision that would be later decried by more than 4000 people. Enoch on Thursday noted Sabsabi's work had been mischaracterised and said he was an "incredibly peace-loving artist", as shown by the way he constructs his images. "This work is not about terrorism," he said. "It is not about the glorification of terrorism. "Those who choose to mischaracterise the work aren't being honest to the intention of the work or the practice that this artist has." But shadow attorney-general Julian Leeser remained unhappy with Creative Australia's reversal, arguing that the issues raised in February remained. "I think this is the wrong person to be sending to this prestigious art festival, as a representative of our country, and to give them taxpayer funds," he told ABC radio. "Particularly given the tensions in Australia and the declining level of social cohesion." The arts funding and advisory body backpedalled on its earlier decision to axe the pair after an independent review found various missteps, assumptions and missed opportunities in the decision-making process. Enoch said Creative Australia believed reinstatement was the best option and would take into account the report's recommendations. "The rigour in which we undertook this was not easy," he said. "It takes a very big heart to go, 'we will engage in the process with integrity and thoughtfulness and move forward', and that's what we've done." The creative duo said the latest decision had renewed their confidence in Creative Australia and "allows us to move forward with optimism and hope after a period of significant personal and collective hardship". An artistic duo who were axed and then reinstated as Australia's picks for one of the world's most prestigious exhibitions have received an apology. The head of the nation's arts body, Wesley Enoch, said artist Khaled Sabsabi's artwork had been mischaracterised and he apologised to him and curator Michael Dagostino. The apology from Creative Australia's acting chair came after it was revealed on Wednesday that the pair will once again represent Australia at the 2026 Venice Biennale, after being dropped in February. "I want to apologise to them for the hurt and pain they've gone through in this process," Mr Enoch told ABC radio, while noting that he had already offered an in-person apology. "Although we will be stronger as a sector because of it, I know it's come at a personal cost - not just to them but also to a whole range of people in the arts sector. "We, as Creative Australia, need to help the whole sector learn some of these lessons going forward." The body initially revoked the pair's invitation after a federal politician raised concerns over Sabsabi's early works, one of which showed Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and another that depicted the 9/11 attacks. Creative Australia had claimed Sabsabi and Dagostino's selection would cause a prolonged and divisive debate and that it would pose an unacceptable risk to public support for the Australian artistic community, leading to the decision that would be later decried by more than 4000 people. Enoch on Thursday noted Sabsabi's work had been mischaracterised and said he was an "incredibly peace-loving artist", as shown by the way he constructs his images. "This work is not about terrorism," he said. "It is not about the glorification of terrorism. "Those who choose to mischaracterise the work aren't being honest to the intention of the work or the practice that this artist has." But shadow attorney-general Julian Leeser remained unhappy with Creative Australia's reversal, arguing that the issues raised in February remained. "I think this is the wrong person to be sending to this prestigious art festival, as a representative of our country, and to give them taxpayer funds," he told ABC radio. "Particularly given the tensions in Australia and the declining level of social cohesion." The arts funding and advisory body backpedalled on its earlier decision to axe the pair after an independent review found various missteps, assumptions and missed opportunities in the decision-making process. Enoch said Creative Australia believed reinstatement was the best option and would take into account the report's recommendations. "The rigour in which we undertook this was not easy," he said. "It takes a very big heart to go, 'we will engage in the process with integrity and thoughtfulness and move forward', and that's what we've done." The creative duo said the latest decision had renewed their confidence in Creative Australia and "allows us to move forward with optimism and hope after a period of significant personal and collective hardship". An artistic duo who were axed and then reinstated as Australia's picks for one of the world's most prestigious exhibitions have received an apology. The head of the nation's arts body, Wesley Enoch, said artist Khaled Sabsabi's artwork had been mischaracterised and he apologised to him and curator Michael Dagostino. The apology from Creative Australia's acting chair came after it was revealed on Wednesday that the pair will once again represent Australia at the 2026 Venice Biennale, after being dropped in February. "I want to apologise to them for the hurt and pain they've gone through in this process," Mr Enoch told ABC radio, while noting that he had already offered an in-person apology. "Although we will be stronger as a sector because of it, I know it's come at a personal cost - not just to them but also to a whole range of people in the arts sector. "We, as Creative Australia, need to help the whole sector learn some of these lessons going forward." The body initially revoked the pair's invitation after a federal politician raised concerns over Sabsabi's early works, one of which showed Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and another that depicted the 9/11 attacks. Creative Australia had claimed Sabsabi and Dagostino's selection would cause a prolonged and divisive debate and that it would pose an unacceptable risk to public support for the Australian artistic community, leading to the decision that would be later decried by more than 4000 people. Enoch on Thursday noted Sabsabi's work had been mischaracterised and said he was an "incredibly peace-loving artist", as shown by the way he constructs his images. "This work is not about terrorism," he said. "It is not about the glorification of terrorism. "Those who choose to mischaracterise the work aren't being honest to the intention of the work or the practice that this artist has." But shadow attorney-general Julian Leeser remained unhappy with Creative Australia's reversal, arguing that the issues raised in February remained. "I think this is the wrong person to be sending to this prestigious art festival, as a representative of our country, and to give them taxpayer funds," he told ABC radio. "Particularly given the tensions in Australia and the declining level of social cohesion." The arts funding and advisory body backpedalled on its earlier decision to axe the pair after an independent review found various missteps, assumptions and missed opportunities in the decision-making process. Enoch said Creative Australia believed reinstatement was the best option and would take into account the report's recommendations. "The rigour in which we undertook this was not easy," he said. "It takes a very big heart to go, 'we will engage in the process with integrity and thoughtfulness and move forward', and that's what we've done." The creative duo said the latest decision had renewed their confidence in Creative Australia and "allows us to move forward with optimism and hope after a period of significant personal and collective hardship". An artistic duo who were axed and then reinstated as Australia's picks for one of the world's most prestigious exhibitions have received an apology. The head of the nation's arts body, Wesley Enoch, said artist Khaled Sabsabi's artwork had been mischaracterised and he apologised to him and curator Michael Dagostino. The apology from Creative Australia's acting chair came after it was revealed on Wednesday that the pair will once again represent Australia at the 2026 Venice Biennale, after being dropped in February. "I want to apologise to them for the hurt and pain they've gone through in this process," Mr Enoch told ABC radio, while noting that he had already offered an in-person apology. "Although we will be stronger as a sector because of it, I know it's come at a personal cost - not just to them but also to a whole range of people in the arts sector. "We, as Creative Australia, need to help the whole sector learn some of these lessons going forward." The body initially revoked the pair's invitation after a federal politician raised concerns over Sabsabi's early works, one of which showed Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and another that depicted the 9/11 attacks. Creative Australia had claimed Sabsabi and Dagostino's selection would cause a prolonged and divisive debate and that it would pose an unacceptable risk to public support for the Australian artistic community, leading to the decision that would be later decried by more than 4000 people. Enoch on Thursday noted Sabsabi's work had been mischaracterised and said he was an "incredibly peace-loving artist", as shown by the way he constructs his images. "This work is not about terrorism," he said. "It is not about the glorification of terrorism. "Those who choose to mischaracterise the work aren't being honest to the intention of the work or the practice that this artist has." But shadow attorney-general Julian Leeser remained unhappy with Creative Australia's reversal, arguing that the issues raised in February remained. "I think this is the wrong person to be sending to this prestigious art festival, as a representative of our country, and to give them taxpayer funds," he told ABC radio. "Particularly given the tensions in Australia and the declining level of social cohesion." The arts funding and advisory body backpedalled on its earlier decision to axe the pair after an independent review found various missteps, assumptions and missed opportunities in the decision-making process. Enoch said Creative Australia believed reinstatement was the best option and would take into account the report's recommendations. "The rigour in which we undertook this was not easy," he said. "It takes a very big heart to go, 'we will engage in the process with integrity and thoughtfulness and move forward', and that's what we've done." The creative duo said the latest decision had renewed their confidence in Creative Australia and "allows us to move forward with optimism and hope after a period of significant personal and collective hardship".
Perth Now
03-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Perth Now
Duo axed from international exhibition receive apology
An artistic duo who were axed and then reinstated as Australia's picks for one of the world's most prestigious exhibitions have received an apology. The head of the nation's arts body, Wesley Enoch, said artist Khaled Sabsabi's artwork had been mischaracterised and he apologised to him and curator Michael Dagostino. The apology from Creative Australia's acting chair came after it was revealed on Wednesday that the pair will once again represent Australia at the 2026 Venice Biennale, after being dropped in February. "I want to apologise to them for the hurt and pain they've gone through in this process," Mr Enoch told ABC radio, while noting that he had already offered an in-person apology. "Although we will be stronger as a sector because of it, I know it's come at a personal cost - not just to them but also to a whole range of people in the arts sector. "We, as Creative Australia, need to help the whole sector learn some of these lessons going forward." The body initially revoked the pair's invitation after a federal politician raised concerns over Sabsabi's early works, one of which showed Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and another that depicted the 9/11 attacks. Creative Australia had claimed Sabsabi and Dagostino's selection would cause a prolonged and divisive debate and that it would pose an unacceptable risk to public support for the Australian artistic community, leading to the decision that would be later decried by more than 4000 people. Enoch on Thursday noted Sabsabi's work had been mischaracterised and said he was an "incredibly peace-loving artist", as shown by the way he constructs his images. "This work is not about terrorism," he said. "It is not about the glorification of terrorism. "Those who choose to mischaracterise the work aren't being honest to the intention of the work or the practice that this artist has." But shadow attorney-general Julian Leeser remained unhappy with Creative Australia's reversal, arguing that the issues raised in February remained. "I think this is the wrong person to be sending to this prestigious art festival, as a representative of our country, and to give them taxpayer funds," he told ABC radio. "Particularly given the tensions in Australia and the declining level of social cohesion." The arts funding and advisory body backpedalled on its earlier decision to axe the pair after an independent review found various missteps, assumptions and missed opportunities in the decision-making process. Enoch said Creative Australia believed reinstatement was the best option and would take into account the report's recommendations. "The rigour in which we undertook this was not easy," he said. "It takes a very big heart to go, 'we will engage in the process with integrity and thoughtfulness and move forward', and that's what we've done." The creative duo said the latest decision had renewed their confidence in Creative Australia and "allows us to move forward with optimism and hope after a period of significant personal and collective hardship".
Yahoo
09-06-2025
- Science
- Yahoo
New Evidence Rewrites the Origins of the Dead Sea Scrolls
Here's what you'll learn when you read this story: A scholar from the Netherlands used AI to determine that the Dead Sea Scrolls may be older than previously believed. The new AI model pairs handwriting data with radiocarbon dating information to date ancient manuscripts. In the future, scientists hope the model will be useful in dating other mysterious ancient texts Dating ancient artifacts is very difficult. Experts have a number of techniques they can use to get close, but there are limitations that often can't be overcome without additional information. That said, sometimes you get lucky, like the researchers investigating the famous Dead Sea Scrolls did when they realized that the author wrote the dates of creation directly on several of the pages. However, not every scroll was labeled, and as a result, the undated Dead Sea Scrolls have been much harder for scientists to pin down. But when new technologies arise, things can change. According to a new study—in which scientists used AI modeling to study handwriting styles across ancient manuscripts with known dates—some of the undated Dead Sea Scrolls may be older than previously believed. Mladen Popovic (from the University of Groningen in the Netherlands) and his research team claim that their work not only re-dates some Dead Sea Scrolls, but could open a new way to place undated manuscripts on the timeline of ancient history. The team published their findings in the open-access journal PLOS One. 'It is very exciting to set a significant step in solving the dating problem of the Dead Sea Scrolls and also creating a new tool that could be used to study other partially dated manuscripts from history,' the authors wrote in a statement. 'This would not have been possible without the collaboration between so many different scientific disciplines.' The process started with a bounty of ancient texts used to help build datasets. The team parsed through historic manuscripts from various sites in modern-day Israel and the West Bank and used radiocarbon dating to estimate the ages of the documents. The team then trained a machine-learning model to understand the handwriting styles of each document in direct relation to the historic date of the manuscript. The AI model—dubbed Enoch, after the prominent biblical figure—then merged the two datasets. The goal of the work is to be able to 'objectively determine an approximate age range' of a manuscript based solely on the handwriting style on the document. During testing, the scholars said that Enoch's age estimates for the 135 Dead Sea Scrolls were 'realistic' 79 percent of the time, and non-realistic 21 percent of the time (non-realistic here meaning significantly too old, significantly too young, or indecisive). The Enoch model, paired with radiocarbon dating, estimates older ages for 'many of the Dead Sea Scrolls' than traditional handwriting analysis methods. The authors said that more data and further research could help pinpoint the timelines. 'With the Enoch tool we have opened a new door into the ancient world, like a time machine, that allows us to study the hands that wrote the Bible,' the authors wrote in the statement, 'especially now that we have established, for the first time, that two biblical scroll fragments come from the time of their presumed authors.' You Might Also Like Can Apple Cider Vinegar Lead to Weight Loss? Bobbi Brown Shares Her Top Face-Transforming Makeup Tips for Women Over 50
Yahoo
07-06-2025
- Science
- Yahoo
AI Program Rewrites Timeline of Dead Sea Scrolls
A newly developed AI model has allowed researchers to re-date many of the Dead Sea Scrolls, some of which now appear to be much older than previously thought. The University of Groningen announced the news in a June 4 press release. The Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered between 1947 and 1956 in the Caves of Qumran, and in the decades since have recontextualized modern understandings of ancient Jewish practices as well as the Bible. Accurately dating the manuscripts is vital to understanding their influence, as well as the time at which they were AI model, known as Enoch, combined carbon-14 dating from 24 separate samples of Dead Sea Scrolls with an AI-driven handwriting analysis to examine micro-level ink-trace patterns on the scrolls. The model then compares known handwriting features with known radiocarbon dates, allowing the AI to understand how handwriting styles evolved throughout time. The AI model can predict the creation date of a given manuscript within 30 years, researchers results astounded scientists. Some scrolls, which were thought to have originated in the Hasmonaean period (150-50 B.C.) are now believed to be from several centuries earlier. Likewise, the Herodian script, which was believed to have been written in the mid-first century B.C., now appears to have been authored in the late second century B.C. "Enoch is the first complete machine-learning-based model that uses raw image inputs to produce probabilistic date predictions for ancient manuscripts," said Maruf Dali, the research team leader. They hope the technology can add similar context to other ancient manuscripts, which might help to understand the political and religious climates of the Program Rewrites Timeline of Dead Sea Scrolls first appeared on Men's Journal on Jun 7, 2025
