Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


New Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by tim123

  1. The problem is that the Tories (to a man) believed it themselves. If they hadn't they would have let Gordo in with his minority governent to dig us into an ever bigger hole before riding to the rescue to get us out tim
  2. I agree. The pligth of Margate is particularly bad and any money that Portas throws at it will be wasted. No-one goes to Margate as a shopping centre and even if they can (big hope, but possible) revive the town as a tourist (day trip) destination this will just help the shops on the sea front. All of the locals go to the new out of town centre so ISTM that they need to bite the bullet and come up with a plan to turn the centre into housing. tim
  3. You're out by a factor of 10 (unless my maths is wrong) Breaking even requires them to pay the interest on the debt not the principle tim
  4. wrt to (1) and (2) I disagree. I pointed out my reasoning for not wanting them and it has nothing to do with them being built next to me As to (3) Guilty - what's wrong with that - would you like to live next to it tim
  5. Sorry I meant other than the state pension. tim
  6. go here and play with the dates until you find what you want http://www.landregistry.gov.uk/public/house-prices-and-sales/search-the-index
  7. Eh, whose threatening death as a penalty? come back when you've stopped asking stupid quesions tim
  8. What is madness is the stupid amount of money that successive (failed) developers have wanted when selling it on. BPS and surroundings could have easily been developed into profitable housing if the price expected for the land reflected the liability that came with it, but as is common in such circumstances the owner of land with a LB on it wanted full value for the land and expected some philanthropic party to pick up the cost of looking after the LB. tim
  9. But the point was (wrt RBS) they didn't. They paid over the odds for that Dutch bank on the assumption that it wasn't infected with US sub-prime loans and then when they opened the books found that it was. Someone at the Dutch bank may have lied, but the people at RBS were (only) negligent tim
  10. This depends upon where yu live (and whast you want). IME your chances of getting a self contained purpose built property in the shires, any way other than through an agent is next to nil. Even rooms in shared houses in that locality is difficult tim
  11. There's no demand for new factories and when there is there is little problem finding somewhere to build them (because brownfield locations next to motorways are actually preferable). The demand for simplified planning is coming from: 1) Multi-national retailers who want 100% of shops to be out of town superstores - do you want this? 2) Developers who want to build 4 bed detached properties in the middle of an idyllic farmer’s field because they know that they can make ten times the profit building them there instead of shoe-horned in between streets of 2 bed terraces. Personally I don't think that we should remove planning restrictions just so that a very very few can make a windfall profit 3) People who want to build mega polluting facilities such as power stations - do you want one of these next to you? tim
  12. But it's not the broken lock. It's the inconvenience and legal costs that you have forced upon the real owner to recover their property, that's the issue. No-one has the right to do this, and it is quite right that doing so is a crime IMHO tim
  13. You do have to put this into the context of somthing like 50% not having any pension provison at all tim
  14. I don't regard someone who has broken into someone elses property and squatted there, as innocent (FSVO breaking in) tim
  15. Then the police wont have done their job properly when he "reports" the crime. Do you really think that they will arrange to turn up mob-handed at the property on the LL's say-so, without first asking "is/was this person your tenant"? tim
  16. No it won't. It will be used when the owner shouts loudly enough! And I doubt that most people will expect this law to result in many convictions. Summary eviction is what they want and, more often than not, the case will be dropped once they get that. tim
  17. The difficulties experienced by people who have suffered this suggest that it isn’t (a criminal offence) If you think otherwise please point us to the statute that includes it tim
  18. Because lying as a (first) defence is not a crime in itself (though it might get you a longer sentence for the substantive crime). Lying when reporting a crime is. And the LL has to take the risk that he will get found out 1 nano-second after the police knock on the tenant's door because the person he is lying about has keep one of the long list of documents that I have already supplied, that will prove he is lying. tim
  19. Though I presume it's a different model Authors of printed books get paid their royalty on the total print run whether it sells or not Presumably with amazon they only get a royalty payment based upon actual sales
  20. That may be true, but IMHO the one thing that ASTs did that opened up the market was the removal of security of tenure. LLs do not want to rent to tenants that they cannot get rid of as it buggers up their exit strategy. Having a sitting tenant devalues the property that they reside in, so you don't want to sell on with one. And ISTM that it's imposssible to have security of tenure without rent controls, as otherwise a LL could circumvent the security problem by jacking up the rent until the tenant can't pay. And investing LLs aren't prepared to let with rent controls. So what part of the AST terms could be modified in tenant's favour without affecting market availability? tim
  • 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.