SNACR Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 Never seen a picture of them before.It's Les Dawson and his lesbian burberry-chav wife. Judging by the blazer I think he meant to go dressed as The Pub Landlord. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scuuzeme Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 I prefer the piggy wiggy myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olliegog Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 do they not know when enough money is enough - they can't spend it all and just become ridiculed and despised. They also give 'boomers' a bad name when most are not like this greedy pair Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si1 Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 Judging by the blazer I think he meant to go dressed as The Pub Landlord. and she appears to be wearing a suit made from 70s Tennants bar-towels, seems fitting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest anorthosite Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 Its true what they say, money really doesn't buy class, does it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNACR Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 The solicitors probably did tell them they didnt have a case. We dont like to lose cases, it makes us look rubbish and only upsets the client in the long run. My firm always tell clients if they dont have a case, especially rich clients. I would say they were probably too stubborn to accept the advice offered. If clients insist on going forward of course the litigators will take their money, but on the whole they would rather accept cases they had a chance of winning. Probably a good litmus test of how much things are unravelling. If they were advised against (I have to be honest, I've noticed solicitors in the past take on hopeless cases because they know their fees will be paid whatever) it's probably a good indication everything's gone to sh1t and they're obsessed with pursuing hopeless court claims and any other minutiae that distracts from the fact they're f*cked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crashologist Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 just thank god they don't dress like the Hoff! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest anorthosite Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 just thank god they don't dress like the Hoff! I don't think Mr Wilson has the style to pull that look off. Oh, and remember the HPC demotivators thread? Here's some of mine from that: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNACR Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 I don't think Mr Wilson has the style to pull that look off.Oh, and remember the HPC demotivators thread? Here's some of mine from that: I must have missed that thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Professor Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 Property tycoons worth £70m demand brand new £3,000 bathroom suite from tenants ... after they broke a toilet lidDaily Mail August 26 2009 Despite amassing a £70 million fortune, and a 700-strong portfolio of buy-to let properties, Judith and Alan Wilson still count the pennies. Right down to the very last toilet lid. The couple, who are the 34th richest couple in the Sunday Times Rich List, have been embroiled in an extraordinary court saga over a broken peach cistern lid - estimated replacement cost £212.75. Mrs Wilson took two tenants to court seeking £3,000 for an entire new bathroom suite all because the lid was accidentally broken and the particular 'colour and design' had been discontinued. But yesterday a county court judge branded Mrs Wilson's claim 'exaggerated', pointing out that a replacement lid, installed by the Wilsons before the case even reached court, was an 'acceptable replacement'. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/...toilet-lid.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garry AKA Pod Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 I don't think Mr Wilson has the style to pull that look off.Oh, and remember the HPC demotivators thread? Here's some of mine from that: I bet you've got a folder on your computer containing everything you've ever uploaded onto HPC haven't you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keef Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 My God, even after all these years I never imagined this hideous couple could: 1) Look so smug. 2) Be so vile looking. 3) Be so spiteful to good tenants despite their plastic wealth. 4) I can't think of a fourth but I hope they die soon. Christ, I feel ill reading that report & seeing their dumb faces peering back at me. Thank Buddha they'll be no more very soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kengan Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 (edited) I thought she was that comedian Alan Carr in drag. Someone has obviously 'got them ready'. They must have been staged for that photo by an 'image consultant' and then they probably demanded a fee from the newspaper, hence the fit-up. "Who ate all the â•¥'s?" Edited August 25, 2009 by kengan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonkers Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 They are up to there eyeballs in debt, clearly. It will not take much for them to sink, the beauty of leverage! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deadman Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 Can you imagine those two actually shagging? Jesus CHRIST she is one ugly mofo! Look at that face! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete.hpc Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 Quite a few people on here always advise coughing up as soon as someone threatens to sue Generally landlords. Never be intimidated by those that have enslaved you, the courts are very much in favour of the little man when it comes to tenants v landlords. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IwantaHome Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 I've been a school teacher since 2004. I am looking to leave the profession soon. Drives me nuts. The holidays are the only positive. That and the actual teaching aspect (a small part of the job). A lot of teachers are freaks. I only have to look at the picture of this couple and I know exactly the kind of people they are. There's also something a tad aspergers about the obsession with a matching suite. There's a lot of teachers on the asperger spectrum, unbeknown to them of course. As to the story. Disgusting how people are allowed to own that many properties. I hope they rot in hell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geezer466 Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 Bugger knows where he gets his bathroom suites from but £3,000 is way over the top. Place round the corner from me does a full set wc, shower tray and hand basin for £110. A bath is an additional £90 but they could always sell the shower tray? Oh and this one is white!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topliner Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 Look after the pennies and the pounds will look after themselves! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
symo Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 The key phrase is "reasonable". If the Wilsons are seen to be trying to make improvements on their property without investment from themselves and using the court to achieve this; that is unreasonable. However in the tenants position I would pop to B&Q, Wickes et al and obtain quotes for replacing a whole bathroom suite and also quotes for just the cistern lid. That would show that the tenant would be prepared to pay reasonable cost for the damage. Also it is important that emails/letters/faxes are presented to show the tenant made reasonable attempts to resolve the situation. If the landlord insists on going to court then the tenant can turn up with correspondence stating what the tenant to be reasonable costs and the landlord looks a right lil' sh!t. Personally though I would tell the presiding court judge that as it is in Ashford the damage constitutes improvement as it clearly show signs of life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neverland Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 Probably a good litmus test of how much things are unravelling. If they were advised against (I have to be honest, I've noticed solicitors in the past take on hopeless cases because they know their fees will be paid whatever) it's probably a good indication everything's gone to sh1t and they're obsessed with pursuing hopeless court claims and any other minutiae that distracts from the fact they're f*cked. Frankly thats bu11sh1t, sorry It depends what their cashflow is like and what their loan covenants are Their equity position will look a lot worse than it did, but if they have the cashflow to keep servicing their loans and no covenant tests coming up they will be fine, as much as it may pain you all No one apart from them and their advisers has any idea about what their position really is Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neverland Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 (edited) duplicate Edited August 26, 2009 by Neverland Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neverland Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 (edited) another duplicate - must learn to type Edited August 26, 2009 by Neverland Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waitingandsaving Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 (edited) Bugger knows where he gets his bathroom suites from but £3,000 is way over the top. Place round the corner from me does a full set wc, shower tray and hand basin for £110.A bath is an additional £90 but they could always sell the shower tray? Oh and this one is white!! Exactly! I'm sorry, but the reason the suite they're after is £3,000 is because it's peach, and the reason they don't make peach bathroom suites is rather similar to the reason they don't come in avocado... So not only are they trying to punish the previous tenant to get them to cough up for the monstrosity, they are desperate to punish future tennants by making them have a peach bathroom. Edit: speeling Edited August 26, 2009 by waitingandsaving Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lulu Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 do they not know when enough money is enough - they can't spend it all and just become ridiculed and despised. They also give 'boomers' a bad name when most are not like this greedy pair But I bet they are only ridiculed and despised on here and maybe a few other places on the internet. To the majority of the population they are probably viewed as being so clever as they are so 'rich' and all on the back of property. They do look like vile specimens in that picture though. Why is it when certain people get into apparent money they fulfil all the stereotypes and try to 'look' rich. Proper rich people do not seem to need to try to show off their wealth but chavs seem to think if one has money they most important thing is to show off with it - what they do not seem to realise is that it usually just makes them look like pillocks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.