Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

ebull

Members
  • Content Count

    384
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About ebull

  • Rank
    HPC Regular

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. "pension pot" 😂 😂 https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3575829-to-have-lost-all-respect-for-pil?messages=100&pg=1 [PIL = parents in law] and reading on
  2. Not necessary to have the UK system of potentially-abusive separate freeholder though. In the UK system there are already three systems which are usually advertised as leasehold: 1. Share of freehold. This is what is used for flats in most of the rest of the world and should IMO be the only option and the one that all existing moves towards. 2. Leasehold with a separate freeholder. Not only private freeholders but often the council are the freeholder and ground rents which are bounded by what the contract says are the smallest problem. Management fees, few hundred for admin fees for looking at a plan to change anything, expensive insurance with a kickback to the freeholder/agent who arrange it, huge fees for maintenance and gardening and concierge and .... well the skys the limit really and either you pay up or lose your flat so they are effectively a blank cheque included as part of the lease. 3.Duchy leaseholds. I don't know the exact details of these but owned by the duchy of Cornwall and leases tend to involve rent of a few hundred a month with lengths of 10-20-30 years and advertised as "renewable". House still prices as 300-400-500k which is maybe only 100-200k less than it would be freehold. Some [limited] details can be seen on RM listings in places like dartmoor. I have read there were special acts of parliament created specially for duchy leaseholds. One easy [and free for the gov] measure that could be implemented is to require ads for leaseholds to include current and maximum possible monthly costs as well as a complete list of fees and potential increases to them. Better still ban these fees. Given how long they are taking with the lettings fees ban, I'm not holding my breath. Have the current reforms insisted on share of freehold as the only option for new blocks?
  3. First charge or second charge? Makes quite a difference and guessing the politicians making the decision don't even understand that.
  4. Conditions on the license make intersting reading. Starts with normal stuff that's the law anyway like yearly gas safety certs. Fair enough. But then single household rental 3-monthly inspections [or HMO 1-monthly] are a requirement. And LL is responsible for tenant not leaving rubbish in the wrong place and/or vermin infestations. Tricky [impossible] requirement so automatically most LL will have broken rules. Traditional method of the corrupt to get others over a barrel and ready for a shake down. Gov wants a nanny state and wants your LL to take on the dranconian role of nanny. First they came for ... is accurate but more worrying for tenants than anyone else. Added to the woes of council-mandated inspections is that no-one with a wish to allow tenants a decent level of privacy, keep all rules and leave them to quiet enjoyment of their home is going to want to be a LL. Leaving only candidates the scumbagLL and crims.
  5. Nobody commenting that its the BBC promoting this and their current deal is that BBC income is reduced by over 75s not needing a license. Something they see as an problem and extra dosh up for grabs. Important to them as increasing numbers of the younger generation don't watch live TV. replace "help the young" with "help the fat cat troughers at the beeb".
  6. Wonder if there's any obligation to tell tenants about this before they sign a contract? [Even an obligation to give an accurate answer if asked]. Sign up for a rent of 300/mo and discover a surcharge of 100/mo on the leccy bill. Bit unreasonable. Also can it be added to rent when claiming HB? If we had competent MPs or even an on-the-ball Shelter charity, would expect these questions to have been enswered when the legislation was passed. By contrast, I assume the extra delays and exemptions are down to lobbying by LL groups.
  7. OK sorry, they seem to have given an extra year. Will apply to existing from 2020. I think at some point it was planned to be this year. https://blog.openrent.co.uk/epc-rules-2018-time-running-out-for-landlords/ Also: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-private-rented-property-minimum-standard-landlord-guidance-documents Suspect that this also means any letting agent who have made a new contract since 2018 in order to collect renewal fees will have caused the LL to need an EPC-E. Bet there are a few in that situation.
  8. I think it's this April that it applies to existing tenancies as well.
  9. Depends on your view of whether authorities will act [against their mates]. IMO no chance. My question is in a different direction. When there is no effective control on quality or even fit for purpose supplied by authorities in a very very expensive and over regulated country, are unregulated free for all countries [aka the third world] not only more pleasant in some respects but also offerring much better value?
  10. Wow. Tests arranged by homeowner showed 7 of 8 samples had too little cement in the sand-cement mix. The HO have basically given up and accepted a solution from Taylor Wimpey which is basically scraping out the bit closest to the surface / re-pointing. The mortar holding the bricks together is basically then still too weak but just held in place by stronger mortar on the outside and [assuming a cavity wall] bits of insultion on the inside. Better make sure you don't lean too hard on them walls. One thing I miss in the article is where is the council in this. Assume that Taylor Wimpey did their own sign off on building regs but surely the council building regs dept could have been involved in assessing the problems. If they are found to be deficient surely Taylor Wimpeys right to sign off their own building regs should be removed. At that point it looks like government dept job. Once again a system where those who break the rules see no / insignificant consequence and just carry on with making their profits.
  11. Annoying that the article / headline is written in a way that suggests or implies: After 6 months prices will restart their never ending march to infinity. Even more remarkable that it's only as a footnote to that article they mention that another report from DPS saying rents down 240/year national average or 300/year in London. When there's an increase in tax allowances of that sort of amount it's headline news, why is this a footnote to something not related in the short term. To further downplay the amount of the drop it's also reported as 20/month [smallest number available from the stats from DPS]. DPS is reporting post-start-of-contract numbers I guess so it's the equivalent of LR stats for sale prices.
  12. Interesting. I didn't know that. I am guessing that it's a reaction to discussions between plebs about not having too many greek and italian notes at the time of the last crises. It is still true that notes have a serial number which identifies it as issued by a specific country [central bank of that country] ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euro_banknotes IOW What they have changed is that it's no longer easy for citizens to find out which country a note belongs to. But if the euro were to fail, banks can still apply an exchange rate to euro notes when they exchange them for new national currencies.
  13. Yes it does. [Very] rich people are free to relocate most countries on the planet. Poor and even those in the middle with some resource generally do not pass the wealth/income tests for papers [long term visas]. EU FOM removes some of that inequality. However both in it's current form and direction of movement excludes the poor from outside the EU and the inequality between EU residents and the non-EU poor is much greater and growing. The result is you need a Trumpian wall and/or deaths on the EU border. Hence med. drownings of black folk which the EU allow-encourage with policy. If people arriving were sent straight back they would stop arriving, if people getting on the boats were given papers to enter the EU they would pay 10% of what they pay to criminals and fly safely. Entirely EU's policy that neither of those happen and convenient for them that they have an excuse / argument / narrative that allows them to claim not to be responsible for the deaths on the border.
  14. So at least a billion from 1.2bn will be unchanged by this. .... "clamp down on excessive exit payments" seems like the wrong description.
  15. Are you aware that every single euro note has letters making it exactly a German euro or Italian euro or .... And are there not rules about what euro zone countries can do? [which are broken and ignored all the time without consequence but can be applied any time the PTB want] During Brexit discussions there has been constant harping on about the EU being rules based. No-one has bothered pointing out that many rules are ignored by most countries [UK is one of the exceptions which is part of the problem the UK has with the EU]. Rules that are just ignored are a standard systemic device in all corrupt undemocratic countries. Everyone in power from the dictator to the coppers on the street can use widely ignored rules as a threat to extort/blackmail. Since that's how the EU rules based system works and Treasons strategy could best be summed up as threaten and blackmail, makes you wonder who she got the idea from.
×
×
  • 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.