Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

sleepwello'nights

New Members
  • Posts

    2,683
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by sleepwello'nights

  1. I think those numbers are in the right region. Going to pensionwise.gov.uk and putting in the assumptions to assess the likely annuity income with a pension pot of £600k it comes up with £150k tax free lump sum and an annuity of £19.3k per annum starting at age 60. That's for a straight single annuity without index linking and no guarantee period. Mind you I can't see why anyone would buy an annuity at the moment, for me each £100k would give me just under £5k. So I wouldn't start getting a return until 20 years had passed. On actuarial basis the pension provider gets better odds than me as an annuitant. If I buy a joint life annuity with my wife we have to survive until we are over 100 years old to get our capital sum back, let alone any yield.
  2. OK, I'm restricting my response to the circumstances posited by the OP. He has said that he agreed a checkout report with the LL's letting agent. The LL then disputed the accuracy of his agents report. In which case surely the tenant can rely on the report submitted by the agent and the LL then is in dispute with his agent. If both parties agree that a particular report is more accurate then does it matter whether it was the first or a later report. The issue to my mind is whether the parties agree with it, if they don't then isn't it simply which parties evidence a judge decides he prefers? Pragmatically the situation where a subsequent report differs from an original report must be very common and is often the subject of negotiation by the parties involved. If it does proceed to litigation isn't it then a question of fact as to which report is the most accurate not a point of law.
  3. Doesn't the issue become one of fact. With a decision to be made by the first judge as to who's evidence he finds more plausible.
  4. I agree with your sentiment. I think as individuals we have a responsibility to manage our own lives as well as we can. I'm in the 1946 - 1956 age range and bought my first house when average prices were 3'ish x incomes. We struggled with mortgage interest rates around 10% + for many years. We didn't buy to impoverish future generations, we bought to fulfill our needs. We've worked, paid taxes, paid National Insurance contributions, saved, invested, brought up our children. We've helped our children with their housing needs. We currently live in a four bedroom house that is bigger than we need on a day to day basis. However it gives us enough room to have our children and their families stay if they wish and we also have room if friends want to come and stay. And yes both my wife and I are eligible for State Pension which we are deferring at present. What a selfish person I must be.
  5. It seems you've already made up your mind. Make sure you take enough precautions to ensure you don't loose your deposit. Essentially get references for the new landlord before you ask your present landlord to use the existing deposit for the last months rent.
  6. As I understand it your conclusion is correct. The agent is acting on behalf of the landlord and he has returned your deposit to you. That's pretty much the end of the matter for you. IF the Landlord disagrees with the actions of his agent then it is up to him to take action against his agent.
  7. Isn't it like the ripple effect. Migrants settle in areas where other migrants live. The people who lived there before start moving away to other areas, so the shortage maifests itself in wider areas around the country.
  8. My thoughts when reading the article centred on what I could do with my savings. I'm over state pension age but still working, sort of, so income and expenditure is not a concern at the moment. Having built up a reasonable fund I'm no trying to work out how to generate an income from it. I was appalled when I looked at annuity rates. At age 67 for a lump sum of £100k I can get a single life annuity that will give me £4000 ish for the rest of my life. So in 25 years I get my capital back. Am I likely to life to 92? I think not. With a joint life annuity including my wife, who is a smoker, the return dwindles to £3000 ish for the rest of the longest survivors life. So one of us has to live for at least 33 years to get our capital back! Thanks, I think I'll book several cruises.
  9. No I think it means that total receipts from the annuity to date are equal to just over half of the annuity purchase price. The annuity will continue to pay out based on the original cost of the annuity for the lifetime of the annuitant, and possibly his spouse if she outlives him. This is dependent on the terms of the annuity purchased.
  10. First of all you don't need to set up a new company. The property management company still exists. What you need to do is to call a meeting and put yourself forward to be appointed a director. You can then run the company. If you go to Companies House website you can download a copy of the Articles of Association, if you don't already have access to a copy. This specifies the rights and obligations of the members to the company. We did this on the development I live in. The managing agents appointed by the developer were not carrying out their duties to the satisfaction of the members. We dismissed them and I was appointed the new managing agent. In your case it should be more straightforward as the position of director is vacant and you don't have to overcome the problem of dismissing an existing director. Have a look at Landlordzone.co.uk you will find a lot of information about the practical issues you may encounter. Another good source is lease-advice.org. Good luck.
  11. Did I imagine a clip on the TV news the other night where Ken Clarke said Members of Parliament were elected to represent the people and it was up to them to decide what was best for the country and they should ignore the result of the plebiscite and do what they think is best for the country, i.e stay in the EU.
  12. I voted leave. I was very surprised to see the result of the referendum was to leave when I read the news in the morning. Non EU immigration was the main reason for voting leave. Although it is within our power to restrict it if the government chooses, the fact that Germany is in favour of Turkey becoming an EU member state and Albania joining then Islamic influences would be strengthened in the EU and our government would be impotent to reduce the flow. I do regret having to vote leave as in my heart I know we are European, with a similar culture and ethos to our neighbours in the continent. However the increasing political power over Europe exercised by German politicians was not something I thought the EU was meant to be. I'm all for closer trading relationships and removal of trade barriers that the EU brought about. In my opinion we will be able to continue without excessive trade restrictions being introduced. I do think we need a new leader with the vision to lead us on the path we have chosen.
  13. The decision shows that the relevant principle is the consistency of the terms of the offer with the standard terms and conditions. Whether it is fair or not is not the determining factor. If a lender wants to issue a loan that is repayable on demand it must show it on the offer, not merely rely on it in its standard terms. It is then for the borrower to decide whether to enter into the contract or not. The point is covered succinctly in the judgement.
  14. My reading of the judgement regarding this point is that to be enforceable it would have to be stated in the offer not just as a clause in the lenders standard terms. This seems to be the whole point of the judges decision; where there is an inconsistency the bespoke terms take precedence over the standard terms.
  15. That's a much more succinct explanation than the news article and the judgement. As regards the consideration it would be like stamp duty being payable on the purchase price plus the interest on the mortgage. I wonder how much it cost us for HMRC to pursue this through the courts? Once again the only winners are the lawyers.
  16. In a word, yes. Your tenancy agreement is a contract between you and the landlord. If the landlord uses an agent then that has no affect on your contract with the landlord. The landlord is free to dismiss any agent he has engaged when he wishes, although termination of his contract with the agent will be subject to any provisions regarding termination in their agreement. Your tenancy should not be affected.
  17. Exactly, so why do planners restrict some dwellings to holiday lets only.
  18. I'm puzzled by the holiday letting restriction. It doesn't really seem to solve any population density issues. The infrastructure needs to be in place to cope with visitors at certain times of the year in any case, so what does it actually achieve? I've never been in favour of restricting anyone ability to live where they want, although I do accept that sometimes there is an over riding need to restrict building whatever you want where you want. Present planning policies seem to favour building large new communities on Greenfield sites to suit the major house builders economic wishes. Villages seemed to evolve attractively without the intervention of planners.
  19. I thought the idea for restrictions on holiday lettings was to ensure that an area didn't become overpopulated and some of its character preserved. Why the hostility towards it?
  20. Its not really neglect though, is it? The render is supposedly maintenance free. Some of the falls shown are probably exaggerated by the games most major house builders played during the early 2000s boom with prices. They often gave inflated values to houses they took in part exchange, subsidised mortgages, offered cash backs to buyers and added "extras": carpets and flooring, kitchen appliances, landscaped gardens. Nonetheless the price drops are an interesting counter to what I see where I live.
  21. There is, I believe, a potential issue that that the buyer is subject to the terms of an existing tenancy. If the occupant at the time of purchase was the owner then there are further complications that may limit the mortgagees right of possession. I don't know how strong they are but it is sufficient to deter a lender to allow a mortgage to be granted. I heard of someone who wanted to purchase a house from the owner and then let them rent it from him, he couldn't find a lender willing to lend on a mortgage. He could only purchase it with vacant possession.
  22. How do this over 60s discounts work. I've looked at the website, it doesn't give any detail its just designed to get you to make an appointment with an advisor salesperson. Am I correct in my understanding that you purchase a house at a maximum discount of 60%, live in it for your lifetime or until you have to go into care and then the Home for life provider gets possession and full ownership of your home. So in effect you are renting the property from 40% of its value at the time of purchase for the indefinite period of your remaining life. Should be OK if you can afford the rent from your pension income and plan to live for longer than average in good health, or is it jam today. If we take an example of a house valued at £400k, you would pay £160k to rent it from age 65. With average life expectancy of 85, then it would cost you £8k per annum, or £667 per month. It doesn't seem that unreasonable to me if it suits your circumstances, the cynic in me thinks the main advantage is for the Home for life provider. What downsides do you think should be considered?
  23. Well having read some articles about Blairmore Holdings, and listened to the clip of John Humphrey's interview with James Quarmby on the BBC website, i'm now of the opinion that there is no substance to the accusations. Cameron has done nothing immoral, unethical or illegal. The whole tone has been set by the use of the term "Offshore Trust" when the investment vehicle is nothing of the sort, it is an OEIC, Open Ended Investment Company, not a personal family trust as implied by the first sensationalist news articles.
  24. The problem there was you wouldn't be paying much interest in the year before you redeemed the mortgage. I wonder what the response would have been if you wanted a mortgage for a longer term.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.