According to Corriepedia Peter and Carla are joint owners but who knows.

in next weeks episodes Max is told about Sarah's baby and he's having a half brother
NO!
he's having a step cousin, Sarah is his step Aunt

Bethany is having a half brother.

Max's dad is the baby's dad so max and the baby are half siblings

I thought that the bookies-then pawn shop-then florist was (in effect) owned by the Trustees of the legacy from Simon's mum for him.

Presuming Amy was in school (and it wasn't an inset day) how on earth did the teacher have time to mark the half-term project already on the first day back?
And why did Simon miss the first day of term - couldn't he have come back a day earlier? He missed enough school last time he went to stay with his dad,
And why couldn't he stayed with Peter long term and spared us of this storyline anyway?

Sarah is not Max's Step aunt. Nick and Sarah have the same biological father, but were adopted by David's father, so they are full siblings. She is a full aunt to him.

I think the proper term for siblings who are also cousins is simply "sibling cousins"

Lucy left her estate to Peter to look after Simon. He invested some of the money in buying the bookies to safeguard it.

Can;y remember what happened after that, except he let Rob and Tracey have it rent free initially for six months in lieu of the winnings he owed Rob but didn't have the money to pay.

Max's Dad is Callum. Max's Mum is Kylie. Since Sarah is not the sibling of either Callum or Kylie then Sarah is not Max's full aunt.

At a push you could say that Sarah is Max's Step Half Aunt. As David is Max's step dad and Sarah is David's half sister. So that would make Sarah's baby Max's Step Half Cousin.

And since Callum is also the baby's dad then Max and Sarah's baby are half siblings.

So Max and Sarah's baby would be Half Sibling Step Half Cousins.

Oh I see what you mean. I was thinking of the step being David to Sarah and Nick rather than David to Max. *head spins* Although I dont think anyone actually calls themselves a step aunty or step cousin in real life, do they?
Whatever they call it, its an awkward situation, thats for sure.

of course, sorry, apologies for forgetting must be the gripping storylines and top notch
writing that caused a lapse of memory there

All this family tree stuff really gets me confused. I can work out my cousins etc., but all all those guys that come in to see my mother, really my Uncles

Didn't Peter lose it as the result of a bet he couldn't pay out on? I think to Rob, but it could have been Nick.

The person who won it agreed to let Peter stay there rent free for six months - something which was never mentioned again.

Considering she was watched like a hawk when she got back, why has no one noticed that Jenny has disappeared

So Steph is 21? Surely she is about 29!

I know, I couldn't believe it when she said it was her 21st!! She looks and acts so much older. Also was she not a friend of Tina's and if she was still alive she would now be about 28

Steph is 21, she came in in 2013 when Katly attended her 18th birthday party

and Tisha Merry, who plays her, is also 21

Peter offers high odds in the bookies. Steve puts down £50 and wins £2,000, which cleaned Peter out.
Rob put £500 on a four horse accumulator, which Peter didn't lay off being confident that he wouldn't win.
Rob won £35,190.00. Peter refused to pay.
Rob threatened to sue Peter for the money so he’d be bankrupt.
Rob and Tracey wanted to start a "cash converter" type business but couldn't afford premises and persuaded Peter to let them have the bookies for six months rent free or they'd go ahead with suing him, after which they'd pay him rent.

As you say it was never mentioned again.

No, Tim does has a mind of his own. He, often, brakes Sally's OT behaviour, quietly and effectively - which is why he is such an interesting character.

Thanks, I seem to have got the main facts completely wrong. So Rob accepted a rent-free six months instead of £35,000 - rents must be high up there. Though, admittedly, there'd have been no point taking Peter to court if he didn't have the money.

A quick calculation shows that a £500 on a four horse accumulator, with all horses at 2-1, would yield £40,500. So the odds were even narrower than 2-1 on at least one horse. So Peter should never have been a bookie, if he thought that couldn't come in.

Robert owns 20% of the bistro already, so why is he having difficulty in raising funds for the other 80% ? And as he's 10 grand short that represents about 8 % ... why not raise that amongst the staff ... giving them an incentive ..... no doubt Dev will buy in

She does look older, though. Maybe it's her severe hair style.

Agree, liked his comments about Phelan tonight. he did make the OH crave lemon puffs though

we had to google her, we all thought that she does look older, especially when she frowns, she ought to take a look at katie ford's wrinkles and reign the frowning in a bit ( I know, mieow)

Or she could take a look at Liz and Carla's botoxed fizzogs and like them go down the ventriloquist's dummy where only the mouth moves route! Gottle o' geer!

The simple rule of bookmaking is never to accept a bet that you are incapable of paying out on and Peter broke that golden rule. Most small betting shops have very strict limits on what they will pay out......you couldn't walk into one and place a bet that would win you £250k or £1m (and if £40k was enough to bankrupt Peter, he was totally in the wrong business)