Maand: november 2020

3.1 The security procedure. The “security procedure” is the procedure defined from time to time by the bank and agreed by the customer as the procedure: which should be used for access to the service and verification of the bank, that any instructions received by the bank through the money payment service (a “payment order”) or any other order, request or other instructions that the bank receives on the service of an account or other service (as well as a payment order, “instructions”) is made by the SA or another AU on behalf of the customer. The security procedure may vary depending on whether access to the service is obtained via Chase Connect or via the Bill.com website, as described in sections 3.2 and 3.3 below, or whether a PC (“PC”) or “Mobile S/AD” (defined in section 7.4) is used to access the service and the Bank reserves the right to set up another security procedure for different AUS. The purpose of the security procedure is to verify the authenticity of the instructions and not to detect errors. The client agrees: (a) to be bound by any instruction given by the SA or another AU; and (b) that any statement whose authenticity has been verified by the bank during the security procedure is effective as a customer, whether authorized or not, and that the statement may result in an overdraft of an account. The bank may also change the security procedure at any time and the customer follows the bank`s instructions on this, as the customer`s continued use of the service is considered the customer`s consent for such a new security procedure. What functions can only be accessed by the account administrator? 5.1.6 The customer authorizes the bank and its GSPs, including, but not only to Bill.com, to debit the payment account in stages or in a lump sum and to transfer funds in accordance with the Customer`s payment orders and to resubmit all ach funds that are returned for insufficient or unrecolected funds or for some other reason. Payments can be made by Bill.com, a state-licensed money issuer. Information about Bill.com`s state license can be accessed app.bill.com/licenses. ACH payments are subject to the rules in force from time to time, established by the National Clearing House Association (“NACHA”), under which the customer is an “initiator”, Bill.com and/or other ASPs are “third parties” and the bank is the financial institution of originating originatory or “ODFI”.

If a charge is returned to the customer`s payment account, the bank may refuse to process the additional payments and the bank reserves the right to stop the payment for all completed payments until the debit is successfully remitted and paid. Without limiting other remedies, if an ACH charge is reimbursed from the payment account due to insufficient resources or other reason, the customer must immediately ask the bank and its ASPs, including, but not exclusively, Bill.com, and the customer is also responsible for the fees and fees provided by the legal agreements relating to the payment account. The bank and its PPUs, including, without restriction, Bill.com, may also exercise their drawing rights in accordance with an agreement or existing legislation. The bank and its PPUs, including, without restriction, Bill.com, can establish appropriate relationships and cooperate with them in the investigations or prosecutions that result.

The important thing is that these expressions act as a quantifier. Thus, although it is a single nomun “number,” it serves the same role in the phrase as a quantifier such as “a lot,” “much,” “much,” “much,” “much,” “many,” “many,” “hundreds,” etc. You would say, “A number of people have started the test,” as you would say, “A lot of people have started the test.” What about the “increasing body of evidence”? the growing body of evidence shows that… It`s true? Can “number” be used with countless nouns? This question often baffles our students! The problem is that the subject verb agreement for the terms “a number” and “the number of” is different. Here, as I usually explain my students: it is a peculiarity of the “number” as a grouping Nobiss. If you had said “group” instead, the singular would have been right: here, it`s even more confusing. In English, “number of” does not mean “much.” Tell your students to consider it a number. Although this number is high, the purpose of this term is to compare this number/amount to another different number/amount. For example, we would say, “The number of crimes in New York has increased this year.” This year, 56 other offences could be committed than the previous year. Another example is that the number of people who write the test today is higher than yesterday. There may be 20 other people writing the test today. The number of students enrolled in the class is 20.

Tell your students to think so: a number of ways a lot. As “a lot of plural nobiss” takes a plural verb, one could say that many cars are on the highway during rush hour. Similarly, you could say, “A number of cars are on the highway at rush hour.” Hello Kian, if you enter the actual number, there is no need for either of the two expressions. We only use “number of” and “a number of” if we do not know the exact amount (in the same way, we would use “a lot” or a lot/a lot”). In your sentence, you should only “Twenty-eight overweight young people… Use. For more information on this exercise, see the choice of these expressions on the Internet, in newspapers or in magazines. In addition, this is a very common grammar issue in Part 5 of the TOEIC test, so make sure that all the students you have who prepare you to write this test will memorize the correct subject verb agreement for these expressions. I hope it`s clear to you and your students! I hope that the number of questions they have about these expressions is now nil. 🙂 Note that “number” is a singular collective whole. “The number of candidates continues to grow.” “A number,” on the other hand, is a plural form: “There are several students in the hall.

Some of them are here to see the president. I put this sentence in a word processing program and point out an error that should be “is. If the majority/minority means an unspecified number of more or less than 50%, use a singular verb: I have a large number of birds The number of birds I have is a large mother, whose expression is appropriate for the use of the subject-verb arrangement is usually quite simple in English. Check each general rules manual. However, for subjects that introduce the idea of quantity, some additional ground rules are needed.

The 1902 treaty was often referred to as a treaty between Ethiopia and Egypt, which dealt with the use of Nile waters. It should be noted that such a treaty did not exist between Ethiopia and Egypt. In fact, the treaty that was discussed was between Ethiopia and Great Britain. At the time, Egypt was a protectorate of the British Empire and the Egyptian government of the day could not enter into international treaties. Finally, in the English version of the 1902 treaty, Ethiopia did not prohibit the use of the Nile, but “forced” Ethiopia not to stop the Nile. This proposal could be interpreted as not completely limiting the flow of the river. In this case, even the 1902 treaty had a language that supports the use of dams if the flow of water is not interrupted. Ethiopia has repeatedly stated that it has no intention of blocking the Nile River, with the aim of having a fair and equitable share of the use of the Nile in all neighbouring countries. According to the scientists who studied this agreement, Ethiopia has a natural and valid right over the waters of the Nile. The rights of Ethiopia “… in a certain proportion of the waters of its own zone are indisputable…

This would be enough to invalidate the agreement, which has no equivalent with Ethiopia. During the battle for Africa, control of the source of the Nile was an important colonial destination for the British. Several agreements have been concluded to this effect, including contracts on the Nile. Ethiopia says there is no legal reason to prevent Addis Ababa from using the waters of the Nile fairly. The obligation imposed by the Anglo-Ethiopian Treaty of 1902 does not prohibit Ethiopia from using the waters of the Nile, even without the agreement of Great Britain (now Sudan). But what is forbidden is a total constipation of the entire Nile water river. The Anglo-Ethiopian Treaty of 1902 was an agreement between Britain on behalf of Sudan (under British rule) and Ethiopia. Although the main objective of the treaty was to determine the border between Ethiopia and Sudan, Ethiopia “committed itself not to build or build work on the Blue Nile, Lake Tana or Sobat that would block the river from their waters in the Nile, except in accordance with the government of its British majesty of Sudan.” Many arguments suggest that Ethiopia is not bound by the 1902 treaty between Ethiopia and the British Empire.