Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Frank Hovis

Members
  • Posts

    20,482
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Frank Hovis

  1. Luvverly! This one had water about two foot up a three foot wall around the garden but the house was set down again so two and a half foot of water would just slosh in without it. Right next to a nice stream which is usually about twelve feet below the height of the wall.
  2. Supermarket food and clothes are both ridiculously cheap compared to how much they cost back in the 80s. Rents and house prices have done their bit in taking up the slack of disposable income.
  3. A couple of rented cottages I know flooded a few years ago as well as last winter. The owner of one was adamant that it had never flooded until the longer-renting neighbour showed the photographs of the previous flood. So out-and-out lie from the owner passd on to the agent who when asked had said it had never flooded and the flood gates were purely precautionary. Never believe the verbal assurance you get from the agent, as you didn't.
  4. That's not going to happen in one fell swoop though, it will take hundreds of years if it does happen. The problem will start more prosaically with sea water inundation reducing the fertility of coastal plains in an erratic manner leading to unexpected shortages and starvation as the food surpluses start running down. I doubt that will be within our lifetimes.
  5. The likeliest is that when there is loss of land then food prices start going up, malnutrition and famines then act as the natural population reducers that they always have. The poorest countries will suffer the worst and this will continue until a lower global population carrying level is reached. Malthus.
  6. Four hour lunch break is it? Agreed that the private / public comparison is not as clear-cut as it was as shown by the LGPS going to career average this year from final salary, and I know somebody who was able to buy IIRC another twenty years of pension contributions for peanuts as part of a redundancy deal, that was worth an absolute fortune and gave an extremely comfortable retirement and is typical of the largesse that we are now all paying for. However I have worked for a council and it was, as regards the office staff, everything the stereotypes say it is. There were rare hard-working exceptions but the majority were time-servers who thought they were underpaid, when given their level of production they were actually massively overpaid. There had been a big restructure including pay cuts through dropping grades a year before which had made many of them look for other work. They found that they couldn't get it so were sat there working not very hard and moaning. There was significant outsourcing planned because I think that this had been recognised.
  7. Boris's Undersea Airport Yes, agree with infrastructure. I would hope that there's more thorough consideration given to a railway line than to twenty "executive" houses but you do never knoe.
  8. Chambers of Commerce, CBI : more immigration (cheaper labour) lower interest rates Unions: pay public sector workers more Building Society Economists: house prices are going up These are bodies representing vested interests that are paid to promote particular lines. None of this should not be published as news.
  9. Exactly. When the "bash the scroungers" policies come out they hit the people who aren't actually scroungers because they can't claim even fringe membership of a "vulnerable" group. JSA for example is a real breadline income and you have to evidence that you're looking for work to get it, it should be increased. When the spare room allowance / bedroom tax was first mooted I thought "great". There is a big problem in council housing stock (in the SW anyway) where people get a three bed because they have a family and thirty years later are living in that same house by themselves and can't be made to move into a one bed so the three bed can go to a family in need of housing (as they once were). Then the legislation exempted pensioners (as a "vulnerable" group) which made it all pretty pointless as 80% of these cases are pensioners.
  10. The missing bit when you compare public and private sector pay is that golden final salary pension. Headline pay figures are quoted but that pension is such a huge financial advantage over the private sector that people will moan and moan but won't leave because they know that pension makes them better off. I am one of the fortunate few with a final salary pension, my employer's contribution is like a further 20%+ of pay if I gross it up. And I see it in those terms even if the majority don't. So anybody on a headline rate of £60k would have to make £72k in the private sector to match it. I don't have much sympathy tbh, they're on a good thing and secretly know it hence the strikes are token one day efforts.
  11. That study says 200 - 900 years before the effects kick in which far exceeds the expected life of any house being built today so there's no need to ban building within a few metres of sea level. Building on flood plains is another matter because it adversely affects existing settlements downstream. If there aren't any and somebody wants to buy a house that gets flooded every winter then who am I to stop them?
  12. Similar came up locally with sewerage problems. The Concil planners deal with infrastructure but the issue of flood risk (for example) is not within their remit and they can't turn down on that basis. That power lies with the ever-useless Environment Agency who have finally got round to dredging rivers on the Somerset Levels.
  13. Recognising reality IMO. I'm back to not being a manager (from choice) and the much cushier life more than makes up for the lower pay.
  14. I very much didn't say this! However people with no visible source of income, council house, and flash car does immediately suggest drugs. Because it is usually the case.
  15. Which would absolutely be the case, you look at the rental stream and the required repairs and if it will actually lose you money (some do, especially anything listed) then you sell it and use the money to build more houses. All councils and HAs do this or should do this.
  16. My standard guess is drugs. I'm not aware of any multi-millionaire Mr Bigs but I do know of some people who make a steady and invisible income delivering to their friends that keeps them in a comfortable lifestyle given that their rent is paid and they get benefits through having no visible income. If they were more ambitious they could do very nicely but with the risk of getting caught. In many ways they are the recipients of the citizens' income for which there is much support on here. I'm not trying to derail the thread with a drugs debate but just to place it on record I don't approve of and don't take illegal drugs, but I have friends that do and I let them get on with it.
  17. Yes. Scotland has very sensibly just abolished it. Public money is spent building houses for social rent at £120k a pop. These are then bought at massive discount by a selected section of people (it's not like private renters can do this). The majority of these houses are then sold on to BTL landlords who charge higher rents and do less maintenance, bringing down the neighbourhood. Winners are: Those select few who can get a fee £70k, and to somebody on a low wage that is like winning the lottery. BTL landlords who get a well-maintained ex-council house. Losers are: Taxpayers who fund the buidling of these social houses. Taxpayers who now have to pay a higher level of housing benefit to pay the rent on the same house. Everybody who doesn't get a free £70k. Mad, unfair policy done in the hope of getting a few more grubby votes.
  18. I've now bought with a decent sized garage so if the name comes back to you I'd be interested. Funnily enough having rented a big place I've bought somewhere small. Mainly because I was getting fed up of all the time I had to spend looking after it, and this was without any maintenance bills. The financial aspect - I remain convinced that there will be a big correction so I have just thrown money away but less so than if I bought somewhere big - was secondary in the end.
  19. I think he means peak at 15%. Although I expect more like a 12 - 14% peak.
  20. Dear Daily Mail Editor I have had my 1988 1.3 litre Ford Escort on sale for £5,000 for the last ten years and still nobody has bought it. I do not understand what is wrong with people, it is a nice colour and still runs. All I can think is that it does not have an integral satnav and that is putting people off. I would much appreciate it if your paper could print a big advert for my Escort masquerading as a serious article about why people are are strange in not wanting to give me £5k for my car. Your Faithfullly Mrs Trellis North Wales
  21. It's done now, but I think if I'd have waited a couple of years I could have bought similar for £80k less so I regret that. But I would have had a very unsettled couple of years waiting for that to happen so I'm viewing it as paying £60k (I'm knocking off two years' rent and expenses) for the convenience and benefits of a permanent base two years early.
  22. People having drinking parties in them, camping in the corners. http://www.westbriton.co.uk/Woman-s-despair-state-Camborne-Cemetery/story-21133593-detail/story.html
×
×
  • 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.