Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Tiger Woods?

Members
  • Posts

    6,111
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Tiger Woods?

  1. You've got to be joking! On no account would I pay a back dated increase in rent, though if it was reasonable would certainly agree to pay it pro rata from the date of notificiation. This is something that should have been sorted out by the agent before the end of the contract, not three months after. Would you pay if they happened to mention it to 12 months after the date? Then why would you pay it after three months? A sudden bill for £150 could cause significant hardship for some. I'm sure the owners wouldn't be impressed about all those expensive fees they pay the agent for this level of service - I suspect the agent is trying to hide his mistake from the owner without eating into his profits.
  2. Um, no we won't - the HSE would never allow it.
  3. Re the comments about major banks not going bust: NatWest nearly went bust in the credit crunch of the 70s. Banks went bust in the 1930s, but money still had value for those who had it. How soon we forget. Spread your risk around. It costs very little.
  4. Any serious deviation in the gbp to us price would lead to immediate arbitrage opportunities. If the GBP dropped relative to the dollar whilst gold held at a constant value, would mean an increase in the value of your gold wrt to the GBP, and conversely.
  5. My recollection is that single purchases under £5000 need not be reported. Annual purchases over £10000 from the same dealer have to be reported. You could consider bullionvault.com or the Perth mint scheme as alternative ways of holding assigned gold.
  6. Or he has worked as a banker, in which case he has obviously been spending too much to only have 130k.
  7. There is no guarantee to recoup £30000 from a bank account. The FSCS will attempt to pay 100% of the first £2000 and 90% of the next £29170 IF they can do so with their funds. The FSCS is not funded by the treasury, but is funded by subscriptions from member institutions. As they say on their site, there are scenarios where one or more institutions fail where the compensation for the first £31170 will not be able to amount to the figures given in the previous sentence. My feeling is that the FSCS is great for a small fund going bust, but won't help you if Barclays comes crashing down. As to the OP concerns - never put your eggs all in one basket, especially in times such as these.
  8. This is not quite true. The FSCS is an independent body set up by the government funded by levies. From their website http://www.fscs.org.uk/consumer/key_facts/..._of_the_scheme/ "The FSA's proposals for reviewing the funding of the FSCS will increase the financial capacity of FSCS. But it is still possible to conceive of a default (or a combination of defaults) so big as to be beyond FSCS's ability to pay compensation up to our limits. The FSA's proposals significantly reduce the probability of this happening, but they cannot completely eliminate it." That is, the FSCS protection is not worth the electrons it is written on in the case of a serious financial blowup in which a major bank or two collapsed.
  9. You should read the fscs site carefully. If a number of banks went to the wall, the full insurance 100% of first £2000, 90% of the next £29700 would not necessarily be able to be paid out. The fscs is only there to deal with small numbers of institutions failing.
  10. Not sure where you would stand legally, but it sounds to me like he wants you to rent the house but also wants to use it as a storage shed. This landlord is taking the mick. I agree with the previous poster - do you really want to rent from someone like this? This is the sort of guy who is going to cause you trouble come "getting your deposit back time". It would want to be an exceptional property at an exceptionally low price, otherwise my advice would be: Run!
  11. True, provided that you don't sleep and can say each number at the rate of 1 per second. Try saying nine hundred and eight seven billion, six hundred and fifty four million, three hundred and twenty one thousand seven hundred and eighty eight in a second, repeatedly and see if you think it is still possible.
  12. I'm from the same area. Couldn't agree more. Very hard to call the top of te market when it is driven by the insane. Anyhow, gratz on buying in 2001. As a junior fellow at the university, I was already priced out by then...
  13. You forgot CGT, which changes the picture significantly. The 30k could be in an ISA with no tax. Wipe 60k off the bull figures and 22k off the bear earnings. In the latter case, they lose money.
  14. £100 for a 12 metre by 3 metre lawn...I'm in the wrong business
  15. Something is distinctly wrong with that data. The data from Jan 07 must come from a different source. I'd discount everything from Jan 07. (Though wouldn't it be nice if it were true! )
  16. I just feel sorry for all the people who took the opportunity cost and direct financial cost of training to be a HIPS inspector. The idea, if implemented properly so that they were of the quality that banks would accept for mortgages etc., would save a lot of money for people who are continually gazumped and weed out time wasting sellers. Instead we have been presented with high farce. Depressing. So depressing. How is it that people like Ruth Kelly (Harriet Harman also springs to mind) can end up in significant positions of power in this country when I wouldn't trust either of them to walk my dog? I find it hard to distinguish much of what comes out of this government from what comes out of student union politics i.e. completely ineffectual, gormless, hot air filled, neurotic twaddle.
  17. After living in a couple of places with electric storage heating - never again.
  18. Nope...have thought about doing what's been suggested, but not sure playing 2000 hands of black jack for £100 is worth it. Might give it a try one day.
  19. Very approximately, you can estimate the variation of your returns on this strategy by using a binomial distribution. Assuming 1% house advantage and assuming you place 2000 £1 bets your profit would, with 95% sureity lie between £35 and £125. The chance of actually making a loss would be about 0.03% If, instead you made 1000 £2 bets your profit would, with 95% sureity lie between £16 and £143. Your cahnce of making a loss would be about 0.6%. For 400 £5 bets your profit would, with 95% sureity lie between -£20 and £180. Your chance of making a loss would be about 6%. Clearly, patience is a virtue :-)
×
×
  • 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.