# Work starts on the eagerly awaited new Foxtons office on Brixton Road



## editor (Dec 6, 2012)

*sobs.

More: http://www.urban75.org/blog/the-brixton-apocalypse-begins-as-foxtons-arrive-on-brixton-road/


----------



## snowy_again (Dec 6, 2012)

Where are they going to store their cars?


----------



## Chilavert (Dec 6, 2012)

Any chance you can take a photo a day Ed to record the progress?


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Dec 6, 2012)

snowy_again said:


> Where are they going to store their cars?


Why, do you have plans for them?


----------



## editor (Dec 6, 2012)

Chilavert said:


> Any chance you can take a photo a day Ed to record the progress?


I've got far better things to do thanks, but feel free to take on the job yourself if it's the kind of thing you're interested in.


----------



## Chilavert (Dec 6, 2012)

editor said:


> I've got far better things to do thanks, but feel free to take on the job yourself if it's the kind of thing you're interested in.


----------



## snowy_again (Dec 6, 2012)

Brixton Hatter said:


> Why, do you have plans for them?


 
Ha, no. There was a bit of a kerfuffle about where they store them as far as I remember - they're company vehicles, which caused problems with CPZs and neighbourhood parking in other areas. There's hardly loads of parking around there at the moment, and 5 or 6 twuntmobiles aren't going to help matters.


----------



## editor (Dec 6, 2012)




----------



## Brixton Hatter (Dec 6, 2012)

snowy_again said:


> Ha, no. There was a bit of a kerfuffle about where they store them as far as I remember - they're company vehicles, which caused problems with CPZs and neighbourhood parking in other areas. There's hardly loads of parking around there at the moment, and 5 or 6 twuntmobiles aren't going to help matters.


There's the new temp car park round the back of the town hall - they could use that and pay like everyone else.

Unless.....can businesses get parking permits to park in CPZs? Or is it just residents?


----------



## snowy_again (Dec 6, 2012)

I saw that last night - massive and yet completely empty.


----------



## cuppa tee (Dec 6, 2012)

I know foxtons have a reputation as particularly odious practitioneers in the black art of property but I can't help worrying that there will soon be a rash of estate agents all with their snouts in the trough, the big players are noticeable by their absence ATM I think and hopefully the main drag of Brixton will not become like Kennington and Clapham.


----------



## editor (Dec 6, 2012)

The main drag is fucked. There's already 4 corporate mobile phone shops within 30m of the tube and a fifth is on its  way.


----------



## Winot (Dec 6, 2012)

I find it hard to understand why there are so many, or rather why so many vendors use them. Most are idiots (as everyone knows) and it's not difficult to sell a property without an agent (and save a fortune).


----------



## cuppa tee (Dec 6, 2012)

editor said:


> The main drag is fucked. There's already 4 corporate mobile phone shops within 30m of the tube and a fifth is on its  way.


 True enough, let's hope it doesn't start spreading out then


----------



## simonSW2 (Dec 6, 2012)

My poor father has been known to confuse Foxtons in Streatham for a generic coffee chain and has shuffled in, taken a seat on one of their gaudy fluro-chairs then tried to work out how to order a drink on more than one occasion.

Their whole Aspirational Lifestyle Design schtick is nauseating, but I look forward to reading their promotional literature to see how many times they describe Brixton as 'vibrant'.


----------



## Manter (Dec 6, 2012)

Winot said:


> I find it hard to understand why there are so many, or rather why so many vendors use them. Most are idiots (as everyone knows) and it's not difficult to sell a property without an agent (and save a fortune).


you need time though.  I wouldn't have time to take calls from people, be there for appointments etc- and I wouldn't have trusted the Northerner to do it 

But we only went to foxtons (to buy not sell) when we were desperate, homeless and the third purchase had fallen through.  And even then I regretted it - it was liking having a faintly dim stalker.  At least four calls a day o the lines of 'Hello madam, I am calling from Foxtons in an area in which you have never show the faintest interest .  We have a rabbit hutch that costs almost twice what you have to spend, when should I arrange your viewing?'

cunts


----------



## Manter (Dec 6, 2012)

editor said:


> The main drag is fucked. There's already 4 corporate mobile phone shops within 30m of the tube and a fifth is on its way.


yes, this

I bloody hope Morleys survives and doesn't become debenhams or something


----------



## lizzieloo (Dec 6, 2012)

Most small towns are full of empty shops, totally dead town centres. You don't know you're born etc etc


----------



## Manter (Dec 6, 2012)

lizzieloo said:


> Most small towns are full of empty shops, totally dead town centres. You don't know you're born etc etc


Lizzie sorts out the Brixton thread


----------



## lizzieloo (Dec 6, 2012)

You'll be telling us your public transport is crap next.


----------



## Winot (Dec 6, 2012)

Manter said:


> you need time though.  I wouldn't have time to take calls from people, be there for appointments etc- and I wouldn't have trusted the Northerner to do it



We did it by having a viewing session every Saturday - give them 20min slots - make sure there's a slight overlap so they can see there's competition - only need to clear up once a week ;-)


----------



## Manter (Dec 6, 2012)

Winot said:


> We did it by having a viewing session every Saturday - give them 20min slots - make sure there's a slight overlap so they can see there's competition - only need to clear up once a week ;-)


bet your house was more desirable than ours... how many Saturdays did you have to do?


----------



## Winot (Dec 6, 2012)

Manter said:


> bet your house was more desirable than ours... how many Saturdays did you have to do?



Can't remember but we had 4/5 offers. This was 2006 though.


----------



## editor (Dec 6, 2012)

lizzieloo said:


> Most small towns are full of empty shops, totally dead town centres. You don't know you're born etc etc


But Brixton isn't a "small town". Brixton is part of Laaaandaaaahn and I imagine there's no shortage of shops that would like to open up on the main drag.


----------



## Manter (Dec 6, 2012)

Winot said:


> Can't remember but we had 4/5 offers. This was 2006 though.


pfffff.


----------



## leanderman (Dec 6, 2012)

Manter said:


> you need time though. I wouldn't have time to take calls from people, be there for appointments etc- and I wouldn't have trusted the Northerner to do it
> 
> But we only went to foxtons (to buy not sell) when we were desperate, homeless and the third purchase had fallen through. And even then I regretted it - it was liking having a faintly dim stalker. At least four calls a day o the lines of 'Hello madam, I am calling from Foxtons in an area in which you have never show the faintest interest . We have a rabbit hutch that costs almost twice what you have to spend, when should I arrange your viewing?'
> 
> cunts


 
Exactly: A cynic would sell through Foxtons, but never buy through them.


----------



## Manter (Dec 6, 2012)

leanderman said:


> Exactly: A cynic would sell through Foxtons, but never buy through them.


I think we've gathered I'm crashingly naive as well as single handedly ruining Brixton. 

Seriously though, do they get better prices/charge lower rates than others?  WHY do people use them?


----------



## Boudicca (Dec 6, 2012)

Manter said:


> I think we've gathered I'm crashingly naive as well as single handedly ruining Brixton.
> 
> Seriously though, do they get better prices/charge lower rates than others? WHY do people use them?


Because they bring in the Claphamites, for whom Brixton still seems relatively expensive.  So they really can get you more money than Haarts.  But they are still twats and I wouldn't use them.


----------



## leanderman (Dec 6, 2012)

Manter said:


> I think we've gathered I'm crashingly naive as well as single handedly ruining Brixton.
> 
> Seriously though, do they get better prices/charge lower rates than others? WHY do people use them?


 
Why buy through them? Either through naivety - or they have the house you want


----------



## fortyplus (Dec 6, 2012)

Just thinking about estate agents exacerbates my hypertension. Their whole business model, buying or letting, depends on people moving all the time, creating transient communities of rootless souls chasing an impossible aspirational dream built like the financial crisis on debts that can never be repaid. There's even one in Clapham that's actually called "aspire", which would be funny if the consequences of their victims missing the irony weren't so tragic for us all.


----------



## lizzieloo (Dec 6, 2012)

.


----------



## Manter (Dec 6, 2012)

leanderman said:


> Why buy through them? Either through naivety - or they have the house you want


Well. You think they have a house that might be worth looking at. But when you get there you discover it is under offer and they evade questions about whether they knew that when you called. But it's ok, they have one round the corner! For that 2 minuted you are in the car they either pump you for information or patronise you (I'm blonde and female- I got the explanation of the city's effect on house prices that was both factually incorrect, poorly expressed and completely irrelevant) before showing you a house that is wildly over priced.  Where they then claim not to see the damp that is running down the walls or the interesting crack where they have put an extension on and merrily knocked out the back wall.  Then they and every other foxtons agent in south London call you once a day for three weeks.

Someone said it is their reward model that makes them behave like that, but <<shudder>>


----------



## quimcunx (Dec 7, 2012)

leanderman said:


> Exactly: A cynic would sell through Foxtons, but never buy through them.


 
sellers have the choice of who to sell through but if you're buying you buy through the agent the house is listed with.


----------



## lizzieloo (Dec 7, 2012)

Who is it OK to buy through in Brixton then?


----------



## quimcunx (Dec 7, 2012)

lizzieloo said:


> Who is it OK to buy through in Brixton then?


 
No one.  Buy in Brixton and you're part of the problem.


----------



## lizzieloo (Dec 7, 2012)

quimcunx said:


> No one. Buy in Brixton and you're part of the problem.


----------



## lizzieloo (Dec 7, 2012)

What about if you pay rent to a landlord that bought up lots of property?

Doesn't that make you part of the problem too?


----------



## quimcunx (Dec 7, 2012)

Yes. 

Imagine a winky face or summat in this and my previous post.


----------



## lizzieloo (Dec 7, 2012)

I don't understand.

Isn't everywhere becoming "gentrified" not just London

I live in the crappier end of a village in North Bucks, loads of the houses in this street are being done up, lots no longer really look like the 1930s semis they are

I'm everso naive, genuine questions.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Dec 7, 2012)

fortyplus said:


> Just thinking about estate agents exacerbates my hypertension. Their whole business model, buying or letting, depends on people moving all the time, creating transient communities of rootless souls chasing an impossible aspirational dream built like the financial crisis on debts that can never be repaid. There's even one in Clapham that's actually called "aspire", which would be funny if the consequences of their victims missing the irony weren't so tragic for us all.


So true, so true.

They need renters to move each year so they can get their fees off the landlords and tenants. They even charge for renewing a contract (they shouldn't iirc due to recent guidelines). When I find somewhere I like, I like to live there for a long time, not move every year, which is just nuts. I love where I live, but with rising prices I'm shitting it that they're gonna ramp the rent up, which could result in having to move to another area


----------



## leanderman (Dec 7, 2012)

lizzieloo said:


> I don't understand.
> 
> Isn't everywhere becoming "gentrified" not just London
> 
> ...


 
Yes, gentrification has spread all across South London, turning unremarkable places such as East Dulwich and Balham into unaffordable ones.

Brixton had avoided this for historic reasons.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 7, 2012)

editor said:


> *sobs.
> 
> More: http://www.urban75.org/blog/the-brixton-apocalypse-begins-as-foxtons-arrive-on-brixton-road/


 
Eagerly awaited by comrade Molotov and his cocktails!


----------



## Badgers (Feb 5, 2013)

A clear sign of Brixton gentrification is that there is NO graffiti on the hoarding outside


----------



## editor (Feb 5, 2013)

It's not big, it's not clever and it's not even well done, but it makes me feel a tiny bit better.


----------



## T & P (Feb 7, 2013)

Between our flat and the two upstairs, our address has received 6 letters like that from Foxtons in one go- three addressed to real residents (though we're the only ones still living here- the two upstairs moved out some time ago) and three addressed to 'the occupier'.

Not the first time it happens either. Fuck knows how much money the parasitic cunts are spending in mailshots across the borough.


----------



## 19sixtysix (Feb 7, 2013)

Is that the old Speedy Noodles place?


----------



## Greebo (Feb 7, 2013)

19sixtysix said:


> Is that the old Speedy Noodles place?


Yes.


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 7, 2013)

I sincerely hope it is vandalised frequently enough for it to be an unpleasant place to work


----------



## Badgers (Feb 7, 2013)

Letter dated 04/02/2013
*Brixton Foxtons office opens on the 9th of March*
*Sell Your Home For Free With Foxtons 0% Commission Offer*

0% commission offer is applicable if you ONLY advertise with Foxtons, otherwise you will be charged 3% commission. If you do advertise with Foxtons the property MUST sell by 5pm on 08/06/2013. This means that offers have to be accepted and solicitors instructed.



> Look at the small print. If they sell before a certain date then there is no fee but if they don’t sell it before then you will pay their 3% commission fee. You are likely to be tied into contract for a long period of time and generally speaking they will overprice initially (to gain little interest) and then push the seller to reduce sales price after the ‘FREE’ period so they can sell it and claim their 3% commission fee. Obvious they would have calculated for a _small_ percentage to sell for free but the majority would be paying. Mark my words I have had past experience of this ‘clever’ marketing ploy.


 
People will take them up on this offer and as a result Foxtons will be able to cover the area with estate agent signs. Also many (greedy) sellers will ditch or choose not to use other local agents in the hope of selling for free.


----------



## colacubes (Feb 7, 2013)

Badgers said:


> Letter dated 04/02/2013
> *Brixton Foxtons office opens on the 9th of March*
> *Sell Your Home For Free With Foxtons 0% Commission Offer*
> 
> ...


 
My first thoughts when I read it was they're not going to really try to get it sold before 8 June so you'll have to pay the commission anyway.  Dodgy gits.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Feb 7, 2013)

simonSW2 said:


> I look forward to reading their promotional  literature to see how many times they describe Brixton as 'vibrant'.


I can see a Brixton Bingo opportunity here....


----------



## 19sixtysix (Feb 7, 2013)

19sixtysix said:


> Is that the old Speedy Noodles place?


 


Greebo said:


> Yes.


 
 :-(


----------



## 19sixtysix (Feb 7, 2013)

I think I will invite round them to value a house on my monopoly board.


----------



## el-ahrairah (Feb 7, 2013)

Come the glorious day, Foxtons will fucking know about it.


----------



## editor (Feb 7, 2013)




----------



## prunus (Feb 7, 2013)

Badgers said:


> Letter dated 04/02/2013
> *Brixton Foxtons office opens on the 9th of March*
> *Sell Your Home For Free With Foxtons 0% Commission Offer*
> 
> ...


 
Also only the 'first 200' people to sign up get the free deal anyway...


----------



## Badgers (Feb 7, 2013)

prunus said:
			
		

> Also only the 'first 200' people to sign up get the free deal anyway...



Also lies ^

Just marketing speak for HURRY UP


----------



## prunus (Feb 7, 2013)

I assumed it was going to be more 'oh sorry you didn't make the first 200, but tell you want, coz I like you why don't I give you a discount to 2% anyway'


----------



## Badgers (Feb 8, 2013)

Take a week or so to get the property listed and paperwork done. 
The property will be overvalued so won't sell. On the rare occasion it does they will be selling both parties mortgage services and anything else they can bolt on. 

Later they will advise the vendor that market conditions mean they need to drop the price (closer to the end of the 0% offer). They also have a brutal legal team behind them. 

I know that staff from Foxtons will hide (or take home) keys to properties they know will sell so other staff can't show buyers the property. Greed is encouraged 

This offer is pure marketing. They will be setting up deals with developers to make the bulk of their early money.


----------



## Badgers (Feb 8, 2013)

Brixton Hatter said:
			
		

> So true, so true.
> 
> They need renters to move each year so they can get their fees off the landlords and tenants. They even charge for renewing a contract (they shouldn't iirc due to recent guidelines). When I find somewhere I like, I like to live there for a long time, not move every year, which is just nuts. I love where I live, but with rising prices I'm shitting it that they're gonna ramp the rent up, which could result in having to move to another area



http://www.oft.gov.uk/news-and-updates/press/2010/19-10#.URRhnEMt3xc


----------



## sparkybird (Feb 8, 2013)

3%! That's shocking. Would expect it to be at least half that....


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 8, 2013)

Accelerant:





Check

Ignition source:




Check.

Anti-police protection device:




Check.


----------



## George & Bill (Feb 9, 2013)

Is there a law against ringing up estate agents in a deep and well-fed home-counties accent, arranging a property viewing, and then sitting sniggering in a cafe across the road watching them pace up and down trying to call you?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 9, 2013)

slowjoe said:


> Is there a law against ringing up estate agents in a deep and well-fed home-counties accent, arranging a property viewing, and then sitting sniggering in a cafe across the road watching them pace up and down trying to call you?


 
No.


----------



## editor (Feb 9, 2013)

Apparently Foxtons have been spamming Clapham households with news of their new Brixton office, trumpeting the lower prices to be had in the area and encouraging Cla'am homeowners get in quick to make a killing.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Feb 9, 2013)




----------



## cuppa tee (Feb 9, 2013)

from Foxtons website



http://www.foxtons.co.uk/living-in/brixton/


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Feb 9, 2013)

Hunting down young professionals and getting them in the food chain via trendy pop-up restaurants. Stringy and gristly bits mechanically retrieved and donated to food banks...Brixton cares!


----------



## Winot (Feb 9, 2013)

cuppa tee said:


> from Foxtons website
> 
> View attachment 28811
> 
> http://www.foxtons.co.uk/living-in/brixton/


 
 Jemima Everden


----------



## George & Bill (Feb 9, 2013)

Busted


----------



## stuff_it (Feb 9, 2013)

simonSW2 said:


> My poor father has been known to confuse Foxtons in Streatham for a generic coffee chain and has shuffled in, taken a seat on one of their gaudy fluro-chairs then tried to work out how to order a drink on more than one occasion.
> 
> Their whole Aspirational Lifestyle Design schtick is nauseating, but I look forward to reading their promotional literature to see how many times they describe Brixton as 'vibrant'.


You should hire him out to people who live near other branches.


----------



## 19sixtysix (Feb 9, 2013)

I think I'll just go in an ask for noodles.

RIP speedy noodles


----------



## Winot (Feb 9, 2013)

19sixtysix said:


> I think I'll just go in an ask for noodles.
> 
> RIP speedy noodles



Excellent. You do that and I'll try and score some E in the Tesco/George IV.


----------



## Greebo (Feb 10, 2013)

slowjoe said:


> Is there a law against ringing up estate agents in a deep and well-fed home-counties accent, arranging a property viewing, and then sitting sniggering in a cafe across the road watching them pace up and down trying to call you?


My good man, I can just about still do that accent, is there any particular place you'd like me to ask them about?


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Feb 10, 2013)

Foxtons selling a few houses in Brixton for £1.5m and above 


http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?loc...ch_form=map&search_type=SS&submit_type=search

http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?loc...ch_form=map&search_type=SS&submit_type=search

http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?loc...ch_form=map&search_type=SS&submit_type=search


----------



## equationgirl (Feb 10, 2013)

Brixton Hatter said:


> Foxtons selling a few houses in Brixton for £1.5m and above
> 
> 
> http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?loc...ch_form=map&search_type=SS&submit_type=search
> ...


And you'll need the same again to heat that £1.6m factory conversion with 20ft high ceilings...


----------



## Paulie (Feb 10, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Hunting down young professionals and getting them in the food chain via trendy pop-up restaurants. Stringy and gristly bits mechanically retrieved and donated to food banks...Brixton cares!


 My brain twisted that into mechanically rendered young professionals.  I'll stick to horsemeat thanks.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Feb 10, 2013)

Paulie said:


> My brain twisted that into mechanically rendered young professionals. I'll stick to horsemeat thanks.


That was the idea. I came over all Mrs Lovett.


----------



## Rushy (Feb 11, 2013)

Brixton Hatter said:


> Foxtons selling a few houses in Brixton for £1.5m and above
> 
> 
> http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?loc...ch_form=map&search_type=SS&submit_type=search
> ...


Blenheim Gardens and (I think) Morrish Road have both been for sale at those prices for at least 5 years. The Citadel one opposite the post ofice is newly on.
Winkworth sold a house for around 1,300,000 on Effra Road recently.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Feb 11, 2013)

Rushy said:


> Winkworth sold a house for around 1,300,000 on Effra Road recently.


 
Effra Road, Herne Hill.


----------



## Rushy (Feb 11, 2013)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Effra Road, Herne Hill.


Hadn't noticed that


----------



## story (Feb 11, 2013)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Effra Road, Herne Hill.


 
That house is not at Herne Hill, it's right at the bottom of Effra Road, before the Eurolink Centre.


----------



## Chilavert (Feb 11, 2013)

cuppa tee said:


> from Foxtons website
> 
> View attachment 28811
> 
> http://www.foxtons.co.uk/living-in/brixton/


First quote was me. 

Seriously though, £1.7m for a two-bedroom house. *head explodes*


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Feb 11, 2013)

story said:


> That house is not at Herne Hill, it's right at the bottom of Effra Road, before the Eurolink Centre.


 
My point exactly. Although I'd have thought these days the estate agents might be moving the border back the other way.


----------



## sparkybird (Feb 11, 2013)

oooo, interesting..I've always thought that Citadel was huge inside - well I suppose it is, but not in all the right places and no garden to speak of.

The one at 31 BG has been on the market forever as Rushy says

For less than half the price (!) you can get a 5 bedroom in the same street, almost opposite, and with a garage -BARGAIN!

http://www.haart.co.uk/HRT011107080


----------



## leanderman (Feb 11, 2013)

sparkybird said:


> oooo, interesting..I've always thought that Citadel was huge inside - well I suppose it is, but not in all the right places and no garden to speak of.
> 
> The one at 31 BG has been on the market forever as Rushy says
> 
> ...


 
and you get 'quiesence'


----------



## laluna (Feb 12, 2013)

Foxtons arrives on Brixton High Street *Lisa packs her bags* sob!


----------



## el-ahrairah (Feb 12, 2013)

laluna said:


> Foxtons arrives on Brixton High Street *Lisa packs her bags* sob!


 
don't pack your bags, make the bastards pack theirs.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Feb 12, 2013)

Brixton Hatter said:


> Foxtons selling a few houses in Brixton for £1.5m and above
> 
> 
> http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?loc...ch_form=map&search_type=SS&submit_type=search
> ...


 
I told them I am NOT selling.....


----------



## lang rabbie (Feb 12, 2013)

At the risk of being regarded as even more of a humourless middle class whatever, I don't find the suggestions that the "solution" to Foxtons is a Molotov cocktail in the least bit funny.  

There are local people living in around half a dozen flats above that parade. 

It remains little short of a miracle that everyone got out alive from the flats above the block that was torched in Hackney in 2011.


----------



## editor (Feb 12, 2013)

lang rabbie said:


> At the risk of being regarded as even more of a humourless middle class whatever, I don't find the suggestions that the "solution" to Foxtons is a Molotov cocktail in the least bit funny.


What we need is an anti-Foxtons force field.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 13, 2013)

Third piece of spam/junk mail from Fuckstons in the last 7 days, this morning. Paper-wasting cunts.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 13, 2013)

lang rabbie said:


> At the risk of being regarded as even more of a humourless middle class whatever, I don't find the suggestions that the "solution" to Foxtons is a Molotov cocktail in the least bit funny.
> 
> There are local people living in around half a dozen flats above that parade.
> 
> It remains little short of a miracle that everyone got out alive from the flats above the block that was torched in Hackney in 2011.


 
TBF, a Molotov cocktail is highly unlikely to set a building on fire. You need raw accelerant, accelerant-soaked combustibles and sustained flame for that, not something that flashes off in a couple of seconds like a Molotov.

At least that's what a fireman told me.


----------



## Crispy (Feb 13, 2013)

lang rabbie said:


> At the risk of being regarded as even more of a humourless middle class whatever, I don't find the suggestions that the "solution" to Foxtons is a Molotov cocktail in the least bit funny.
> 
> There are local people living in around half a dozen flats above that parade.
> 
> It remains little short of a miracle that everyone got out alive from the flats above the block that was torched in Hackney in 2011.


Remember this? http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/fire-on-brixton-road.173567/


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Feb 13, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Third piece of spam/junk mail from Fuckstons in the last 7 days, this morning. Paper-wasting cunts.


Yeah, same again here


----------



## leanderman (Feb 13, 2013)

'Cafe-style office' - how ridiculous.


----------



## DietCokeGirl (Feb 13, 2013)

I seem to have received 3 leaflets in 3 days offering to buy the flat I don't even own to sell them. (Not that I would anyway).


----------



## Badgers (Feb 13, 2013)

leanderman said:


> 'Cafe-style office' - how ridiculous.


 
How to get around change of use for commercial premises


----------



## gaijingirl (Feb 13, 2013)

Badgers said:


> How to get around change of use for commercial premises


 
oh FFS! I always wondered what the point of those cafestate agents were... fuckers!


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Feb 13, 2013)

Badgers said:


> How to get around change of use for commercial premises





gaijingirl said:


> oh FFS! I always wondered what the point of those cafestate agents were... fuckers!


 
I'm not very familiar with this new phenomenon but does that mean they are encouraging people in with coffee? Anyone? I could see that backfiring.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Feb 13, 2013)

I'd love to lounge around all day in their premises looking as disreputable as I can muster.....I mean, they sent us letters...that's an invite, no?


----------



## T & P (Feb 13, 2013)

I'd love to take a baseball bat to all those batteries of fizzy water bottles they keep in their oh-so-cool counters with built-in glass fronted fridges. See them explode into a million pieces with water spraying everyhere, like a Sony TV advert.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Feb 15, 2013)

We haven't had anything from Foxtons through the door....but every other estate agent in the whole of south London appears to have been putting shit through the letterbox this week


----------



## Stash (Feb 15, 2013)

lang rabbie said:


> At the risk of being regarded as even more of a humourless middle class whatever, I don't find the suggestions that the "solution" to Foxtons is a Molotov cocktail in the least bit funny.
> 
> There are local people living in around half a dozen flats above that parade.
> 
> It remains little short of a miracle that everyone got out alive from the flats above the block that was torched in Hackney in 2011.


 There were no flats set on fire in the Hackney riot. Cars & bins, yes; buildings, no. You must be confusing it with somewhere else.
Not to detract from your point.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Feb 15, 2013)

Stash said:


> There were no flats set on fire in the Hackney riot. Cars & bins, yes; buildings, no. You must be confusing it with somewhere else.
> Not to detract from your point.


 
Croydon, I think. That was where the photo of the woman jumping was taken iirc.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Feb 15, 2013)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Croydon, I think. That was where the photo of the woman jumping was taken iirc.


Yup.


----------



## Corax (Feb 15, 2013)

Are Foxtons more arsehole than other estate agents then?  I've never come across them tbh.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Feb 15, 2013)

They certainly have the cuntiest offices. I believe the designer got a CBE for Services to the British Cunt Industry.


----------



## cuppa tee (Feb 15, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> They certainly have the cuntiest offices. I believe the designer got a CBE for Services to the British Cunt Industry.


Cnut of the British Empire ?


----------



## el-ahrairah (Feb 15, 2013)

lang rabbie said:


> At the risk of being regarded as even more of a humourless middle class whatever, I don't find the suggestions that the "solution" to Foxtons is a Molotov cocktail in the least bit funny.
> 
> There are local people living in around half a dozen flats above that parade.
> 
> It remains little short of a miracle that everyone got out alive from the flats above the block that was torched in Hackney in 2011.


 
it's not a solution, it's a stop gap measure until the revolution's work is done.


----------



## el-ahrairah (Feb 15, 2013)

Crispy said:


> Remember this? http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/fire-on-brixton-road.173567/


 
see, perfectly safe.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 15, 2013)

leanderman said:


> 'Cafe-style office' - how ridiculous.


 
Cafe-style office = half-empty coffee cartons, and condiments on every desk.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 15, 2013)

T & P said:


> I'd love to take a baseball bat to all those batteries of fizzy water bottles they keep in their oh-so-cool counters with built-in glass fronted fridges. See them explode into a million pieces with water spraying everyhere, like a Sony TV advert.


 
You haven't had sex lately, have you?


----------



## Badgers (Feb 15, 2013)

I am un-subscribing from this thread as it depresses me. 

Instead I will invest my time wasting theirs


----------



## T & P (Feb 15, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> You haven't had sex lately, have you?


 Now that you mention it...


----------



## DietCokeGirl (Feb 15, 2013)

Let's print the old speedy noodle logo onto loads of flyers/stickers/banners and cover the front in the middle of the night. Repeat each time they clean it up.


----------



## el-ahrairah (Feb 15, 2013)

a firebomb is much quicker and more effective


----------



## ddraig (Feb 15, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Yup.


thought that pic had been found not to have been taken in Croydon?


----------



## leanderman (Feb 15, 2013)

ddraig said:


> thought that pic had been found not to have been taken in Croydon?


 
It is Croydon, I think

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...pt-for-life-filmed-rioter-starting-blaze.html


----------



## Boudicca (Feb 15, 2013)

DietCokeGirl said:


> Let's print the old speedy noodle logo onto loads of flyers/stickers/banners and cover the front in the middle of the night. Repeat each time they clean it up.


I like this idea, but there are just too many cameras on the high street.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Feb 15, 2013)

Corax said:


> Are Foxtons more arsehole than other estate agents then? I've never come across them tbh.


 
They're particularly bad at being estate agents. Youing, fuckwitted, no idea about the picomarkets within individual areas.


----------



## Dan U (Feb 15, 2013)

ddraig said:


> thought that pic had been found not to have been taken in Croydon?



. It's definitely Croydon. Internet people mistook the tram signs at the bottom of Surrey street and on the left of the picture for Dutch signs iirc. 

Sometimes mad shit on the Internet is real!


----------



## lang rabbie (Feb 15, 2013)

Stash said:


> There were no flats set on fire in the Hackney riot. Cars & bins, yes; buildings, no. You must be confusing it with somewhere else.
> Not to detract from your point.


I of course meant *Tottenham* - where the former Co-op building (latterly Allied Carpets) had twenty-six flats upstairs and twenty-six households made homeless. Sorry for the Transpontine lack of thought.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 15, 2013)

Dan U said:


> . It's definitely Croydon. Internet people mistook the tram signs at the bottom of Surrey street and on the left of the picture for Dutch signs iirc.
> 
> Sometimes mad shit on the Internet is real!


ok ta
apols for even questioning the correctness of a post by Mrs M!  *runs


----------



## Dan U (Feb 15, 2013)




----------



## editor (Feb 16, 2013)

This is what we want.


----------



## Crispy (Feb 16, 2013)

leanderman said:


> It is Croydon, I think
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...pt-for-life-filmed-rioter-starting-blaze.html


Yep, the diamond speed signs are for the tram


----------



## lang rabbie (Feb 16, 2013)

editor said:


> This is what we want.
> 
> View attachment 29063


 
When the mighty waters of the majestic River Effra are in full spate no one should stand in nature's way.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 16, 2013)

editor said:


> This is what we want.
> 
> View attachment 29063


 
And then sink the fucking barge.


----------



## editor (Feb 16, 2013)




----------



## T & P (Feb 16, 2013)

Corax said:


> Are Foxtons more arsehole than other estate agents then? I've never come across them tbh.


They are cunts of the highest order; the only estate agent to operate outside the agreed code of conduct by the industry.

Infamous for knocking on the doors of people with for-sale signs on their house and promise much higher sale price if they ditch their estate agent and go with them. Invariably the properties will remain unsold for months and the seller eventually agrees to lower the asking price to a more realistic one. But by then Foxtons has stolen them from the competition, which was their game plan all along. Their agents all look like complete cunts, and I'm willing to bet this is one instance where you _can_ judge a book by its cover. They drive and park like utter selfish wankstains as well.

Parasitic scum.


----------



## Ol Nick (Feb 18, 2013)

Despite all the bad things people are saying about them they will not only give me a free valuation, but also find me the perfect tenants. So there.

Actually I'll see what they can do abut the noodles too.


----------



## fortyplus (Feb 18, 2013)

I really can't see how replacing a  minor rodent infestation with a major scumbag infestation improves things.


----------



## snowy_again (Feb 18, 2013)

Ol Nick said:


> Despite all the bad things people are saying about them they will not only give me a free valuation, but also find me the perfect tenants. So there.
> 
> Actually I'll see what they can do abut the noodles too.


 
They found me tenants once*. They then charged for every thing they possibly could; even work I'd done on their behalf.

Tenants all looked good on paper and had to pay some exorbitant registration fee. Foxton's messed up the household inventory meaning they appeared to put all of my personal possessions into the agreement (books, pictures, record collection). That was rectified, until it got around for the tenants to pay rent month two, which they refused to pay as they had a contract and it also included all my possessions on the inventory. Got rid of Foxtons in two days and would never ever touch them as a tenant or a renter again.

We had a a4 glossy poster / flyer thing through the door today; evidently the people they get to distribute them don't understand the 'no junk mail' signs on most doors on my street.

* ten years ago in a different borough.
/csb


----------



## Ms T (Feb 19, 2013)

We got a flyer today as well.


----------



## nagapie (Feb 19, 2013)

Me too.


----------



## leanderman (Feb 19, 2013)

Foxtons is not exactly new to Brixton. They have been 'active' here since at least 2005.


----------



## editor (Feb 19, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Foxtons is not exactly new to Brixton. They have been 'active' here since at least 2005.


But their big shiny stomach-churning trendy cafe-office smack bang in the middle of town will be.


----------



## T & P (Feb 19, 2013)

Say, there isn't any chance of an empty Victoria Line train overshooting the station, breaking through the ground and crashing into the premises, is there?


----------



## editor (Feb 19, 2013)

Be terrible if a rubbish cart lost control and hit the new Foxtons.


----------



## Gixxer1000 (Feb 23, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Foxtons is not exactly new to Brixton. They have been 'active' here since at least 2005.


 Yes, bought a house on Elm Park through them back in 1999


----------



## MillwallShoes (Feb 25, 2013)

protest against the rising tide of the use of the word "awesome" in brixton.


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 25, 2013)

It's a pretty standard alternative to 'great'. Use it myself and I'm almost 40.


----------



## MillwallShoes (Feb 25, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> It's a pretty standard alternative to 'great'. Use it myself and I'm almost 40.


i have personal issues with the word.

do you like hand made cup cakes and/or have a giant beard?


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 25, 2013)

Hate cupcakes, have small beard.
It's a great word! It's awesome


----------



## fortyplus (Feb 25, 2013)

The devaluation of superlatives is a continuous process in the evolution of language. Awesome will be replaced by something else even more annoying.


----------



## leanderman (Feb 25, 2013)

'Pre-ordering' is quite annoying


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 25, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> It's a pretty standard alternative to 'great'. Use it myself and I'm almost 40.


I wouldn't be surprised if you still describe things as 'mega' irl


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 25, 2013)

leanderman said:


> 'Pre-ordering' is quite annoying


And 'pre-planning' as though there was 'post-planning'


----------



## Rushy (Feb 25, 2013)

fortyplus said:


> The devaluation of superlatives is a continuous process in the evolution of language. Awesome will be replaced by something else even more annoying.


 
Totes amazeballs.


----------



## 19sixtysix (Feb 25, 2013)

Rushy said:


> Totes amazeballs.


----------



## 19sixtysix (Feb 25, 2013)

I believe the modern usage is sick for the superlative.


----------



## fortyplus (Feb 25, 2013)

19sixtysix said:


> I believe the modern usage is sick for the superlative.


Only in connection with beats.


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 25, 2013)

Shut it granddads


----------



## ash (Feb 26, 2013)

MillwallShoes said:


> protest against the rising tide of the use of the word "awesome" in brixton.


It's pretty standard amongst primary school children in the Brixton confines so you're probably a bit 'old school' as the primary kids would also say


----------



## editor (Mar 7, 2013)

Nice piece in the Standard (of all places):



> My Faustian pact with an estate agent
> 
> As part of my ceaseless and spirit-sapping search for a first flat, I was recently driven around Brixton in a Foxtons Mini. If you want to know what it’s like to be loathed, jump in. People glare at you. They cut you up. They curl their lips. I suspect I’d have had a better reception in one of those tiny-todger-compensating supercars. Or a Nazi tank.
> 
> ...


----------



## Badgers (Mar 7, 2013)

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/lond...ebook-rant-8222720.html?origin=internalSearch

Another Standard article


----------



## Badgers (Mar 7, 2013)

editor said:
			
		

> Nice piece in the Standard (of all places):



I think you have the wrong article linked Ed?


----------



## editor (Mar 7, 2013)

Badgers said:


> I think you have the wrong article linked Ed?


No, it's the right one. The Foxtons piece is half way down.


----------



## Boudicca (Mar 7, 2013)

I was discussing with a friend the possibility of turning up on Saturday with 'Bring back Speedy Noodle' placards.


----------



## Badgers (Mar 7, 2013)

editor said:
			
		

> No, it's the right one. The Foxtons piece is half way down.



Yup


----------



## leanderman (Mar 7, 2013)

I wish the new facade didn't look so nice


----------



## MillwallShoes (Mar 7, 2013)

just driven through brixton. was overtaken by a police car that i swear was doing about 120mph down the london road into brixton.


----------



## Rushy (Mar 7, 2013)

B





MillwallShoes said:


> just driven through brixton. was overtaken by a police car that i swear was doing about 120mph down the london road into brixton.


Bloody Foxtons.


----------



## MillwallShoes (Mar 7, 2013)

MillwallShoes said:


> just driven through brixton. was overtaken by a police car that i swear was doing about 120mph down the london road into brixton.


whoops, wrong thread


----------



## Kanda (Mar 8, 2013)

Happy Friday Brixton...


----------



## TruXta (Mar 8, 2013)

Dickhead Central HQ


----------



## paulhackett (Mar 8, 2013)

T & P said:


> They are cunts of the highest order; the only estate agent to operate outside the agreed code of conduct by the industry.
> 
> Infamous for knocking on the doors of people with for-sale signs on their house and promise much higher sale price if they ditch their estate agent and go with them. Invariably the properties will remain unsold for months and the seller eventually agrees to lower the asking price to a more realistic one. But by then Foxtons has stolen them from the competition, which was their game plan all along. Their agents all look like complete cunts, and I'm willing to bet this is one instance where you _can_ judge a book by its cover. They drive and park like utter selfish wankstains as well.
> 
> Parasitic scum.


 
I've been Foxtons kidnapped (not the only agents who do this, so their business model is being used by others. Other agents are now opening offices with the 0% commission too).. the agent was OK (in the great scale of Estate Agent cunts there are worse). They told me other agents rip their signs down and it's only when they finish training, they're told where they'll be working.

If I was selling, I'd be pleased to know the agent was trying to drum up (relatively well) targetted business. Buyers are aware of the Foxtons premium but in a tight market there are enough buyers desperate enough to pay it.

According to an agent near me a one bed flat they just sold went for a price 2 years ahead of the market (20% higher than the asking price - thank you sealed bids). They overprice as it will either sell as there is a lack of stock or you can tip the price down to something more 'realistic'. Foxtons sellers with 0% commission are having to make a decision to accept offers or pay the commission ('they have until Friday to accept..'). 

I can cope with their Sales as an individual (although they're impacting negatively on small agents). Their Lettings dept. is a disgrace.


----------



## artyfarty (Mar 8, 2013)

The social event of the season has happened, I was there, anyway I walked past and here's the evidence. My over whelming impression was that there was a lot of dark grey suits and paper plates...


----------



## quimcunx (Mar 8, 2013)

paulhackett said:


> They told me other agents rip their signs down


 
They put a sign up on our flats even though there was no flat for sale. Fuckers.


----------



## MillwallShoes (Mar 8, 2013)

.


----------



## gaijingirl (Mar 8, 2013)

artyfarty said:


> View attachment 29939View attachment 29940
> 
> The social event of the season has happened, I was there, anyway I walked past and here's the evidence. My over whelming impression was that there was a lot of dark grey suits and paper plates...


 
that is the most cringeworthy photo I've seen on u75 and there's been plenty....


----------



## MillwallShoes (Mar 8, 2013)

artyfarty said:


> View attachment 29939View attachment 29940
> 
> The social event of the season has happened, I was there, anyway I walked past and here's the evidence. My over whelming impression was that there was a lot of dark grey suits and paper plates...


christ, i wonder how many iphones are in that room.


----------



## MillwallShoes (Mar 8, 2013)

gaijingirl said:


> that is the most cringeworthy photo I've seen on u75 and there's been plenty....





gaijingirl said:


> that is the most cringeworthy photo I've seen on u75 and there's been plenty....


i gotta feeling it'll add another three pages to this thread.


----------



## Rushy (Mar 8, 2013)

artyfarty said:


> View attachment 29939View attachment 29940
> 
> The social event of the season has happened, I was there, anyway I walked past and here's the evidence. My over whelming impression was that there was a lot of dark grey suits and paper plates...


OMG. The aliens have landed.


----------



## artyfarty (Mar 8, 2013)

gaijingirl said:


> that is the most cringeworthy photo I've seen on u75 and there's been plenty....


You've made my day!
They looked embarrassed to be themselves.....


----------



## MillwallShoes (Mar 8, 2013)

am i right in saying it used to be where speedy noodles once was?


----------



## gaijingirl (Mar 8, 2013)

MillwallShoes said:


> am i right in saying it used to be where speedy noodles once was?


 
yeah..


----------



## artyfarty (Mar 8, 2013)

Sorry, here's another one.....


----------



## ddraig (Mar 8, 2013)

is matey boy in the red tie practising his pitch or doing his self pep?


----------



## MillwallShoes (Mar 8, 2013)

looks like hell. i wonder how many of them felt relaxed at any point.


----------



## MillwallShoes (Mar 8, 2013)

or being sucked off by a ghost with giant head


----------



## artyfarty (Mar 8, 2013)

There's more... you want more?


----------



## ddraig (Mar 8, 2013)

go on
almost sloaney like


----------



## gaijingirl (Mar 8, 2013)

personally.. no thanks.  It'll just be slagging off individuals and anyway - it's too depressing.


----------



## editor (Mar 9, 2013)

artyfarty said:


> The social event of the season has happened, I was there, anyway I walked past and here's the evidence. My over whelming impression was that there was a lot of dark grey suits and paper plates...


I wish I could _unview_ that scene.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Mar 9, 2013)

quimcunx said:


> They put a sign up on our flats even though there was no flat for sale. Fuckers.


firewood


----------



## el-ahrairah (Mar 9, 2013)

gosh, i wish i'd walked passed foxtons when that was going on.  i'd have pressed my arse cheeks up against that window and wiggled like your dad dancing at a wedding.


----------



## billythefish (Mar 9, 2013)

I walked past too, and was wondering how long it would be before someone put a Mini through that window.

BTW - are estate agents the only people who wear suits these days?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 9, 2013)

quimcunx said:


> They put a sign up on our flats even though there was no flat for sale. Fuckers.


They could have been done for that...£2,500 maximum penalty....
http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/Services/HousingPlanning/Planning/EstateAgentBoards.htm


----------



## quimcunx (Mar 9, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> They could have been done for that...£2,500 maximum penalty....
> http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/Services/HousingPlanning/Planning/EstateAgentBoards.htm


 
I phoned them and they claimed it had been sold now (wasn't on the 'include recent sales' search) and had it taken down within 24 hours after I told them to.  I think I already said about this at the beginning of this thread.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 9, 2013)

I know the Office of Fair Trading had run-ins with them about fly-boarding. They made a big mistake when they stuck a board outside Alistair Campbell's house...


----------



## 19sixtysix (Mar 9, 2013)

I've ripped down many boards outside our flat. It not allowed and the fuckers nail into our brick work. I have informed the odd estate agent that if it happens again I'll be nailing it to their shop window.

The wood can be very useful source in projects.


----------



## leanderman (Mar 9, 2013)

I remove 'let by' and 'let by and managed' signs in this street. Estate agents put them up as adverts. Why do we need to know they have (already) let a property to people?


----------



## shakespearegirl (Mar 13, 2013)

I had a look in the window when  I walked past last night. £455k for a two bedroom flat in Elm Park, yes it looks nicely done but way overpriced. You can buy a three bedroom house in the next street for less than that..


----------



## pissflaps (Mar 13, 2013)

without the residential sales/letting industry, the arse would fall out of the not-very-lucrative bike hockey scene.

/trupost.


----------



## Kanda (Mar 13, 2013)

shakespearegirl said:


> I had a look in the window when I walked past last night. £455k for a two bedroom flat in Elm Park, yes it looks nicely done but way overpriced. You can buy a three bedroom house in the next street for less than that..


 
Same can be said all over London. Doesn't matter what is on the next road really.

More crazy Brixton:

http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?bedrooms_from=2&center_point_name=SW2 4EN&keyword_type=postcode&lat=51.447194658835&lon=-0.127290579194229&property_id=728144&radius=0.5&search_form=keyword&search_type=SS&sold=1&submit_type=search

http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?bed...word&search_type=SS&sold=1&submit_type=search


----------



## shakespearegirl (Mar 13, 2013)

Looking at historical prices for Elm Park Road it does seem at the very high end. Kanda, i'd agree about the next road generally, but I know the area and prices around Elm Park well and you the adjoining streets are as nice or nicer, in the same school zones, less traffic and normally more expensive.

http://www.zoopla.co.uk/house-prices/london/elm-park/


----------



## Kanda (Mar 13, 2013)

House prices for Victorian conversions are at their highest at the moment. It's the Clapham etc overspill and gentrification of Brixton.

The flat I am buying is under 200k, the next road I can see into the garden of 700k+ properties. (Holmewood Gardens area)


----------



## stevebradley (Mar 13, 2013)

leanderman said:


> I remove 'let by' and 'let by and managed' signs in this street. Estate agents put them up as adverts. Why do we need to know they have (already) let a property to people?


 
If abused, Estate Agents boards are anti-competitive.

The most effective form of avertising for Estate Agents is their 'board count'. As a general rule - if someone see lots of boards in their area from a particular agent when they're thinking of buying, selling or renting, they will tend to assume that company is one of the better ones so are more likely to consider them. Estate Agents know this, so they obsess about their board count. Whacking signs up which are unrelated to any actual sales is effectively cheating both ordinary people and the competition. Foxtons have history on this - but they're not alone.

Leaving signs up longer than the statutory period (shoul be removed 14 days after sale or let) is much more rife in Lambeth - some signs stay in place for months if not years. I had a motion passed at Full Council two years ago calling on Lambeth to write to all agents asking them to clean up their act on this, and threatening action on those who didn't. Despite it getting passed as policy, it seems nothing was done about it. I asked Lib Peck a follow-up question on it 6mths later (it was her portfolio at the time) and got a garbled response which basically confirmed nothing had been done. I will ask again at the next opportunity, as it seems that the council still doesn't take the mushrooming of estate agents' signs across the borough seriously. Seems it's okay to turn a blind eye to some free advertising in our public realm - yet I've had small local shops in my patch threatened by the council and told to take down PVC banners etc.


----------



## editor (Mar 13, 2013)

Classy.


----------



## leanderman (Mar 13, 2013)

And they can't even spell: The Keatings boards advertising Sudbourne school fair had '23st March'. Van was sent round yesterday to change them all to '23rd March'


----------



## TruXta (Mar 13, 2013)

leanderman said:


> And they can't even spell: The Keatings boards advertising Sudbourne school fair had '23st March'. Van was sent round yesterday to change them all to '23rd March'


I know for a fact that they're incompetent cunts.


----------



## MillwallShoes (Mar 13, 2013)

i wanna know where these people who buy up the sort of places mentioned here send their kids to school? from what i can make out, they don't send them to any of the schools i know in the brixton area.

private schools? genuine question.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 13, 2013)

Kanda said:


> Same can be said all over London. Doesn't matter what is on the next road really.
> 
> More crazy Brixton:
> 
> http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?bedrooms_from=2&center_point_name=SW2 4EN&keyword_type=postcode&lat=51.447194658835&lon=-0.127290579194229&property_id=728144&radius=0.5&search_form=keyword&search_type=SS&sold=1&submit_type=search


 

Is that the old stables?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 13, 2013)

shakespearegirl said:


> Looking at historical prices for Elm Park Road it does seem at the very high end. Kanda, i'd agree about the next road generally, but I know the area and prices around Elm Park well and you the adjoining streets are as nice or nicer, in the same school zones, less traffic and normally more expensive.
> 
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/house-prices/london/elm-park/


 
ELM PARK


----------



## shakespearegirl (Mar 13, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> ELM PARK


 
Sorry Minnie...


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 13, 2013)

shakespearegirl said:


> Sorry Minnie...


 
I forgive you


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Mar 13, 2013)

(Re: Keating) 





TruXta said:


> I know for a fact that they're incompetent cunts.


After they kinda fucked me as a tenant years ago, I call them "Cunting Estates" 

Btw Kanda, sounds like you're very near to us! (though our place was nowhere near £700k!  )


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 13, 2013)

Kanda said:


> Same can be said all over London. Doesn't matter what is on the next road really.
> 
> More crazy Brixton:
> 
> http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?bedrooms_from=2&center_point_name=SW2 4EN&keyword_type=postcode&lat=51.447194658835&lon=-0.127290579194229&property_id=728144&radius=0.5&search_form=keyword&search_type=SS&sold=1&submit_type=search


That would be impossible to heat, must be freezing in this weather.


----------



## editor (Mar 13, 2013)

sleaterkinney said:


> That would be impossible to heat, must be freezing in this weather.


If you can afford that kind of 'lifestyle loft living', you can afford to blow a ton of dosh on heating.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 13, 2013)

sleaterkinney said:


> That would be impossible to heat, must be freezing in this weather.


 
They should make him knock down the bit that juts out to save pedestrians having to walk in the road to get around it


----------



## Kanda (Mar 13, 2013)

sleaterkinney said:


> That would be impossible to heat, must be freezing in this weather.


 
Not at all. If it's insulated/double glazed it should be fine. Probably has underfloor heating though a floor that size.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 13, 2013)

Why are the kids beds laid out in a row like that?  Very strange set-up considering how much space there is


----------



## Greebo (Mar 13, 2013)

Kanda said:


> <snip>More crazy Brixton:
> 
> http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?bedrooms_from=2&center_point_name=SW2 4EN&keyword_type=postcode&lat=51.447194658835&lon=-0.127290579194229&property_id=728144&radius=0.5&search_form=keyword&search_type=SS&sold=1&submit_type=search<snip>


Soulless, ridiculously tidy, but OMFG all that floor space  - want.  And can't have.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 13, 2013)

Greebo said:


> Soulless, ridiculously tidy, but OMFG all that floor space - want. And can't have.


 
I do like a bit of floor space, and loads of room to store stuff for hoarders


----------



## Winot (Mar 17, 2013)

More seriously, I wonder if a mod would mind moving the posts here (perhaps from post 204?) to this thread? There's a lot of interesting stuff here, and it'd be a shame if it got lost on a thread about estate agents.

Mrs Magpie


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 17, 2013)

Winot said:


> More seriously, I wonder if a mod would mind moving the posts here (perhaps from post 204?) to this thread? There's a lot of interesting stuff here, and it'd be a shame if it got lost on a thread about estate agents.
> 
> Mrs Magpie


 
I'm not sure that's possible. We can merge two threads but I don't know about migrating individual posts to another thread. Lazy Llama will know if that's do-able.


----------



## Lazy Llama (Mar 17, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> I'm not sure that's possible. We can merge two threads but I don't know about migrating individual posts to another thread. Lazy Llama will know if that's do-able.


It's doable in a slightly roundabout fashion. 
First you need to select the posts that you want to move, then select the 'Move posts' moderation option to move them to a new, temporary thread. You can then merge the new thread with an existing one.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 17, 2013)

I suspect that's too much faff, tbh. Mind you, I speak from the point of view of the mod who fucks up thread merges


----------



## Lazy Llama (Mar 17, 2013)

I've moved the school-related posts to that thread now.


----------



## BJM2012 (Mar 20, 2013)

T


Greebo said:


> Soulless, ridiculously tidy, but OMFG all that floor space - want. And can't have.


 

I'm pretty sure they were filming something in that flat before Christmas. I live down the road from it and asked a sound tech what they were doing. It was doubling for a studio in Shoreditch apparently. £1.5m for that is a bit of a piss take really.

Morrish Road is now awash with these fucking Foxtons signs. I counted six within 40 metres of each other the other day.


----------



## editor (Mar 20, 2013)

BJM2012 said:


> Morrish Road is now awash with these fucking Foxtons signs. I counted six within 40 metres of each other the other day.


----------



## Kanda (Mar 20, 2013)

BJM2012 said:


> T
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
2 got clothes lined by drunkards and now lay down in the gardens... shocking behaviour  I suspect this will keep happening...  The one on the flats seemed a bit trickier, I doubt it will stay long though...

They film in that flat all the time, Tinie Temper, Charlotte Jackson done something (fit Sky Sports presenter), Ian Brown... few others


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 20, 2013)

Kanda said:


> 2 got clothes lined by drunkards and now lay down in the gardens... shocking behaviour  I suspect this will keep happening...  The one on the flats seemed a bit trickier, I doubt it will stay long though...
> 
> They film in that flat all the time, Tinie Temper, Charlotte Jackson done something (fit Sky Sports presenter), Ian Brown... few others


 
Yeah, I've seen bright flashes when I've walked past and assumed the owner must be a photographer or something


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 20, 2013)

BJM2012 said:


> Morrish Road is now awash with these fucking Foxtons signs. I counted six within 40 metres of each other the other day.


 
It's also awash with litter.  It's one of the untidiest streets around (towards the Brixton Hill end where the shops are), unless they have foxes/cats that are redistributing litter all over the pavements


----------



## BJM2012 (Mar 20, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> It's also awash with litter. It's one of the untidiest streets around (towards the Brixton Hill end where the shops are), unless they have foxes/cats that are redistributing litter all over the pavements


 
 There is an impressive stack of dog shit outside my front door, so I can atest to that. It looks like a shithole, to be perfectly honest. We're definitely the bad relations to Sulina Road.


----------



## Kanda (Mar 20, 2013)

BJM2012 said:


> There is an impressive stack of dog shit outside my front door, so I can atest to that. It looks like a shithole, to be perfectly honest. We're definitely the bad relations to Sulina Road.


 
The back door of the pub is a favourite puking spot, why do they bother going up those stairs to chunder? I nearly slipped over once, I now leave by the front door.


----------



## leanderman (Mar 20, 2013)

More depressing still is the surviving, but litter-strewn, bit of Rush Common. It looks ok only after cutting, when the lawnmower blades have shredded the rubbish to nothing.


----------



## Winot (Mar 20, 2013)

leanderman said:


> I wish the new facade didn't look so nice


 
It looks like something from A Clockwork Orange.


----------



## leanderman (Mar 20, 2013)

Winot said:


> It looks like something from A Clockwork Orange.



korova milk bar!


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Mar 20, 2013)

What's the rule about estate agent signs I saw earlier on somewhere in this thread - something about them only being allowed to be up for 14 days?


----------



## leanderman (Mar 20, 2013)

Steve Bradley posted something


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 23, 2013)

Estate agents used to just leave signs up.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Mar 24, 2013)

more anti-Foxtons campaigning


----------



## Rushy (Mar 27, 2013)

No the most creative of protests but a protest none the less:


----------



## paulhackett (Mar 27, 2013)

94 of the 100 most recently added properties (just searched this morning) on Zoopla are being sold by Foxtons.. across the price ranges. Whatever they're doing has impacted (even if it's just marketing).


----------



## leanderman (Mar 27, 2013)

Rushy said:


> No the most creative of protests but a protest none the less:
> 
> View attachment 30675



Do people still say 'yuppies'? Aren't we supposed to hate 'hipsters' now?


----------



## innit (Mar 27, 2013)

paulhackett said:


> 94 of the 100 most recently added properties (just searched this morning) on Zoopla are being sold by Foxtons.. across the price ranges. Whatever they're doing has impacted (even if it's just marketing).


I think it's a combination of the 0 commission offer and the fact that they are valuing properties way, way higher than haart and local agencies.


----------



## Rushy (Mar 27, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Do people still say 'yuppies'? Aren't we supposed to hate 'hipsters' now?


Perhaps it is a clue as to the age of the perpetrator


----------



## clandestino (Mar 27, 2013)

Hipsters can't afford to buy and sell houses.


----------



## cuppa tee (Mar 27, 2013)

Also featured on Brixton Blog with comments.......... http://www.brixtonblog.com/yuppies-out-scrawled-across-window-of-new-foxtons-on-brixton-road/10823


----------



## clandestino (Mar 27, 2013)

This reminds me a bit of the graffiti that was on the hoarding outside the old Russell Hotel. 

Now a Tesco...


----------



## paulhackett (Mar 27, 2013)

innit said:


> I think it's a combination of the 0 commission offer and the fact that they are valuing properties way, way higher than haart and local agencies.


 
94% is a high %.. higher valuation bands (they work in 25,000s at the lower end) can always be negotiated down. Every buyer knows there is a Foxton's premium. They also know that is a prop doesn't sell and it is closing in on end of 0% commission time, you can offer (at the every least the balance in commission between 2.5% and a local agent) so the buyer doesn't have to pay Foxton's more..

It means if you want to buy in the Brixton area you will almost certainly have to buy through Foxton's.. who will then be able to claim a higher and more recent sales record than any other agent. And so it will continue. Moving forward other agents will start adopting sharper practices to survive..


----------



## secateurz (Mar 27, 2013)

its what Fucksticks do though right? Value everything higher and its a vicious circle, seller is told foxtons will get them more, they go with foxtons, they have more control over the market... I have been burnt to the tune of many thousands twice after Foxtons interfered with a purchase.


----------



## leanderman (Mar 27, 2013)

ianw said:


> Hipsters can't afford to buy and sell houses.



is that true?


----------



## TruXta (Mar 27, 2013)

paulhackett said:


> 94% is a high %.. higher valuation bands (they work in 25,000s at the lower end) can always be negotiated down. Every buyer knows there is a Foxton's premium. They also know that is a prop doesn't sell and it is closing in on end of 0% commission time, you can offer (at the every least the balance in commission between 2.5% and a local agent) so the buyer doesn't have to pay Foxton's more..
> 
> It means if you want to buy in the Brixton area you will almost certainly have to buy through Foxton's.. who will then be able to claim a higher and more recent sales record than any other agent. And so it will continue. Moving forward other agents will start adopting sharper practices to survive..


Keatings at least already have answered with a 0% commission rate of their own.


----------



## Rushy (Mar 27, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Keatings at least already have answered with a 0% commission rate of their own.


Have they? Their flyer two weeks ago warned sellers not to sign up to 0% deals with locally inexperienced agents.


----------



## TruXta (Mar 27, 2013)

Rushy said:


> Have they? Their flyer two weeks ago warned sellers not to sign up to 0% deals with locally inexperienced agents.


Pretty sure I saw a poster of theirs with a prominent 0% on it. Could have misread it of course.


----------



## Rushy (Mar 27, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Pretty sure I saw a poster of theirs with a prominent 0% on it. Could have misread it of course.


I think you may have done. They launched a campaign which targeted Foxtons 0% deal without naming Foxtons. It had a big 0% on it but basically suggested that the 0% deal was for suckers. Reckon the 0% deal must be hard to resist if you are selling.


----------



## TruXta (Mar 27, 2013)

Rushy said:


> I think you may have done. They launched a campaign which targeted Foxtons 0% deal without naming Foxtons. It had a big 0% on it but basically suggested that the 0% deal was for suckers. Reckon the 0% deal must be hard to resist if you are selling.


You could well be right, yeah.


----------



## hendo (Mar 27, 2013)

Such is the demand for property in London that using an estate agent is probably a waste of money - my workmate has just been gazumped for the second time while trying to buy here. I reckon I'd try to go it alone if I was selling at the moment.


----------



## shakespearegirl (Mar 27, 2013)

secateurz said:


> its what Fucksticks do though right? Value everything higher and its a vicious circle, seller is told foxtons will get them more, they go with foxtons, they have more control over the market... I have been burnt to the tune of many thousands twice after Foxtons interfered with a purchase.


 
I think people are aware of how shitty Foxtons are though, I would never sell my house through them.

When I sold my flat in Loughborough Junction, Oliver Burns in Herne Hill valued it much much higher than Haarts in Brixton or Burnet Ware in Herne Hill who both came in at the same price. 

I went with Haarts & Burnet Ware on a joint deal, sold at a fair price in 3 weeks. Downstairs neighbour sold his a year later through Oliver Burn who overvalued it and it took him months to shift. 

Foxtons sold a friends flat in Clapham, reeled him in on  a high valuation and over the next couple of months devalued it by 25%


----------



## TruXta (Mar 27, 2013)

shakespearegirl said:


> I think people are aware of how shitty Foxtons are though, I would never sell my house through them.
> 
> When I sold my flat in Loughborough Junction, Oliver Burns in Herne Hill valued it much much higher than Haarts in Brixton or Burnet Ware in Herne Hill who both came in at the same price.
> 
> ...


Sadly they got the valuation for the flat we're currently in spot on, didn't take more than 2 weeks for the landlady to get her asking price.


----------



## Rushy (Mar 27, 2013)

shakespearegirl said:


> I think people are aware of how shitty Foxtons are though, I would never sell my house through them.
> 
> When I sold my flat in Loughborough Junction, Oliver Burns in Herne Hill valued it much much higher than Haarts in Brixton or Burnet Ware in Herne Hill who both came in at the same price.
> 
> ...


 
Mate of mine was advised  by two agents for his 2 bed in Herne Hill. One agent advised putting it on at 345 for a slowish sale or 325 for a faster sale. He put it on at 325 on the Thursday, had eight bids at asking price by Saturday, went to sealed bids and sold for 345ish on the Monday. He was rather pleased.


----------



## el-ahrairah (Mar 27, 2013)

hipsters are a subset of yuppies, to my mind.


----------



## TruXta (Mar 27, 2013)

el-ahrairah said:


> hipsters are a subset of yuppies, to my mind.


There's some overlap, but no, they're not.


----------



## Chilavert (Mar 27, 2013)

Hipsters are far too, well, hip to be yuppies.


----------



## TruXta (Mar 27, 2013)

Chilavert said:


> Hipsters are far too, well, hip to be yuppies.


Indeed most are. Though you do see some 30/40 somethings that manage both. Worst of both worlds


----------



## editor (Mar 27, 2013)

Hipsters don't seem to be much of anything.


----------



## TruXta (Mar 27, 2013)

editor said:


> Hipsters don't seem to be much of anything.


They sure seem to get up your goat if nothing else


----------



## Chilavert (Mar 27, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Indeed most are. Though you do see some 30/40 somethings that manage both. Worst of both worlds


Yuppies having some sort of early mid-life crisis. Poor lambs.


----------



## Rushy (Mar 27, 2013)

Chilavert said:


> Yuppies having some sort of early mid-life crisis. Poor lambs.


Is 40 something early for a mid-life crisis?


----------



## TruXta (Mar 27, 2013)

Rushy said:


> Is 40 something early for a mid-life crisis?


Bang on time I reckon. Why, you having one or planning to have one?


----------



## Chilavert (Mar 27, 2013)

Rushy said:


> Is 40 something early for a mid-life crisis?


I think 40s fine Rushy tbh, I was covering myself though as TruXta also mentioned 30-somethings.


----------



## editor (Mar 27, 2013)

TruXta said:


> They sure seem to get up your goat if nothing else


Not really, although their general lack of political interest is disappointing.


----------



## TruXta (Mar 27, 2013)

editor said:


> Not really, although their general lack of political interest is disappointing.


Who are you referring to really? Honestly curious. It's not like hipsters are a demography that is clearly defined.


----------



## Rushy (Mar 27, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Bang on time I reckon. Why, you having one or planning to have one?





Chilavert said:


> I think 40s fine Rushy tbh, I was covering myself though as TruXta also mentioned 30-somethings.


Phew. Thought I might be peaking early...


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 27, 2013)

cuppa tee said:


> Also featured on Brixton Blog with comments.......... http://www.brixtonblog.com/yuppies-out-scrawled-across-window-of-new-foxtons-on-brixton-road/10823


 
First comment 







Ian March 27, 2013 at 1:45 pm · Reply
hmm… not bad, no spelling mistakes; however I think a more effective ‘protest’ would be to get nicely drunk, walk in, sit down and order a number 24 and a number 35 (don’t go for the green curry was always awful) and repeat weekly – if group dinners can be arranged even better…


----------



## TruXta (Mar 27, 2013)

Brilliant.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 27, 2013)

I got another four Foxtons envelopes through front door this week


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 27, 2013)

Is this a cop shop employee?



> Peter Bradley March 27, 2013 at 1:40 pm · Reply
> I for one am 100% in favour of gentrification. We have to live in a world where people need to see their surroundings look better – if you live in a nice place, it will attract nice people and the whole area moves upmarket. What are these dale-park-idiots trying to preserve? Scruffy old market stalks selling cheap imports from china, looking more and more likes some filthy medina every day, or nice clean businesses where you are prepared to take your kids without exposing them to clouds of marijuana and psychos with mental health issues. Poor ghettos don’t work, they never have and never will. Forget this rose-tinted idea of Brixton as a happy clapping steel drum playing mix – there is a really nasty side to it that I would happily gentrify out to the burbs. * I would love all these bleeding heart liberals to just spend one week working in Brixton police station.*


----------



## editor (Mar 27, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Who are you referring to really? Honestly curious. It's not like hipsters are a demography that is clearly defined.


I'm referring to the subset of people that people would generally describe as 'hipsters.' I don't think they're that hard to identify, tbh, but perhaps you think differently.

I'm not going to compile a Hipsters' Spotting Guide though. If you're not sure, I'm sure the web can help you on that score.

Edit to add: I don't bring up hipsters so I'm not sure why you're asking me anyway.


----------



## TruXta (Mar 27, 2013)

editor said:


> I'm referring to the subset of people that people would generally describe as 'hipsters.' I don't think they're that hard to identify, tbh, but perhaps you think differently.
> 
> I'm not going to compile a Hipsters' Spotting Guide though. If you're not sure, I'm sure the web can help you on that score.
> 
> Edit to add: I don't bring up hipsters so I'm not sure why you're asking me anyway.


The point I made is that people you see as hipsters others might just see as something else entirely. You seem to have a fairly set idea on who they are, based on looks I take it. And you don't bring up hipsters? Are you having a laugh? You go on and on and on about how they've ruined Brixton for you FFS.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 27, 2013)

> Will March 27, 2013 at 12:53 pm · Reply
> It amazes me that people can get so spectacularly strung out by the opening of an estate agency branch and suddenly decree that it is gentrification gone mad and Brixton is going to the dogs. Brixton has considerably bigger problems than the opening of an estate agency – I will cite the burglary/ransacking and two muggings that I and my partner have suffered in the two years that he has lived there as a readily available example.
> 
> Whichever way you look at it, daubing paint on the window of a shop is just pointless vandalism. Furthermore, it won’t have the desired effect, unless the desired effect is to give passers by a bit of a giggle, in which case it’s a roaring success.
> ...


 
I don't want Foxtons in my life and yet they bombard the public's letterboxes with their crap


----------



## editor (Mar 27, 2013)

TruXta said:


> The point I made is that people you see as hipsters others might just see as something else entirely. You seem to have a fairly set idea on who they are, based on looks I take it. And you don't bring up hipsters? Are you having a laugh? You go on and on and on about how they've ruined Brixton for you FFS.


I didn't mention them in this recent discussion and I'm curious why you're only interested in my opinion of what a hipster is. Anyone might think you're just spoiling for a point scoring fight.

Sorry. Not playing ball. Too dull.


----------



## TruXta (Mar 27, 2013)

editor said:


> I didn't mention them in this recent discussion and I'm curious why you're only interested in my opinion of what a hipster is. Anyone might think you're just spoiling for a point scoring fight.
> 
> Sorry. Not playing ball. Too dull.


Whether you brought them into it or not is besides the point. The point being you're damned quick to point fingers at this group of people you refer to as hipsters, yet when asked who these people are you have no answer. Bit strange is all. As you were then.


----------



## editor (Mar 27, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Whether you brought them into it or not is besides the point. The point being you're damned quick to point fingers at this group of people you refer to as hipsters, yet when asked who these people are you have no answer. Bit strange is all. As you were then.


You're a bit obsessed. Get over yourself, ffs.


----------



## TruXta (Mar 27, 2013)

editor said:


> You're a bit obsessed. Get over yourself, ffs.


Done that twice already today, but thanks anyway. Anyway, this was all a bit of a derail - what I thought was interesting before we got into the buns was you said that hipsters have a general lack of political interest. Now, most people arguably have a lack of political interest, whether by choice or by necessity. What if anything, in your opinion, marks the disinterested hipster out as noteworthy? Assuming you are talking about a well-defined group of people here.


----------



## editor (Mar 27, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Done that twice already today, but thanks anyway. Anyway, this was all a bit of a derail - what I thought was interesting before we got into the buns was you said that hipsters have a general lack of political interest. Now, most people arguably have a lack of political interest, whether by choice or by necessity. What if anything, in your opinion, marks the disinterested hipster out as noteworthy? Assuming you are talking about a well-defined group of people here.


I've still no idea why you remain solely interested in my opinion of what makes up a hipster here - why aren't you asking other posters too? I didn't even bring them up but you're like a dog with a bone here.
The odd thing is that it's not like I've said anything remotely contentious - the apparent general lack of political drive in hipster culture is well documented:


> What are hipster political views? Vaguely leftist but basically apathetic and non-committal. Hipsters do not get involved with politics. The only political issue they are likely to be passionate about is environmentalism. That’s the default hipster cause. Vegan and organic food and bicycle lanes and neighbourhood preservation are offshoots of that, but the anti-gentrification neighbourhood preservation thing is really merely a form of self-interested snobbery.
> http://www.cloudadagents.com/the-common-hipster-a-marketers-field-guide/





> Hipster culture, adds Heath, seems aware of its own political irrelevance.
> “Hipsters don’t pretend they are changing the world with their moustaches,” he says. “Hipster culture, as a counterculture, is exclusively apolitical.”
> http://uniter.ca/view/6927/


I hope that answers your question in full. If you're still not sure what a hipster looks like, ask another poster because I'm not interested in indulging the festival of nitpicking you no doubt have all revved up and ready to go.


----------



## TruXta (Mar 27, 2013)

editor said:


> I've still no idea why you remain solely interested in my opinion of what makes up a hipster here - why aren't you asking other posters too? I didn't even bring them up but you're like a dog with a bone here.
> The odd thing is that it's not like I've said anything remotely contentious - the apparent general lack of political drive in hipster culture is well documented:
> 
> 
> I hope that answers your question in full. If you're still not sure what a hipster looks like, ask another poster because I'm not interested in indulging the festival of nitpicking you no doubt have all revved up and ready to go.


 
Jaysus, a bit defensive today? I asked you some simple questions based on posts you made. Why? Because you do go on and on about these dastardly people. Proving that I'm not the only obsessive.

As for those links they deal with US and presumably Canadian "hipsters" - I'm far from convinced that whoever you label as hipsters in London are of a kind.

But sure, everyone, what's a hipster look like? If you asked me 10-15 years ago I'd probably have said someone with dreads, trailer cap, Vans, checked shirt. These days? Something else. Anyone?


----------



## editor (Mar 27, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Why? Because you do go on and on about these dastardly people.


Do I really? So how many times have I referred to them this month before you kicked off? Care to hazard a guess?

Here's the answer: *Once* - and that was about the dire sausage dog cafe. And not once the month before.


----------



## el-ahrairah (Mar 27, 2013)

TruXta said:


> There's some overlap, but no, they're not.


 
i think so.  they're basically yuppies who want to be cool.  middle class, self-obsessed, lots of spare cash, identifiable lifestyles of conspicuous consumption.  how are they not?


----------



## TruXta (Mar 27, 2013)

editor said:


> Do I really? So how many times have I referred to them this month before you kicked off? Care to hazard a guess?
> 
> Here's the answer: *Once* - and that was about the interminable sausage dog cafe. And not once the month before.


And in the years before? Nevermind, it's beside the point. I think what irks me really is the way you use "hipster" as a catch-all for a variety of different groups: younger people with hairstyles and fashion ideas you don't like, others maybe more of the Claphamite variety, yet others the demonic gentrifiers of Brixton. Yet in my experience the only thing they have in common is bothering you. Which is fine - be bothered all you like. I'm bothered by lots of things too, many of them probably the same things as you're bothered by.

Yet the irony is that once upon a time you were the hipster that came in and changed the neighbourhood. You and your ilk.


----------



## Chilavert (Mar 27, 2013)

My view of a contemporary hipster, in terms of uniform at least, would include, but not be limited to:

Skinny jeans, including turns up so that socks are clearly visible.
Plaid shirt/slim-fit t-shirt/knackered looking Fair Isle knitwear or similar.
Thick-rimmed 'NHS' glasses, probably without actual lenses.
Woolly hat with bobble (this must be perched on top of the wearer's head though, allowing the full forehead to be visible, ideally with forelock showing.

Accessories include: Satchel, Apple products, fixed wheel bike or something that looks like it just arrived from the 1930s, complete with basket and non-digital camera.


----------



## TruXta (Mar 27, 2013)

el-ahrairah said:


> i think so. they're basically yuppies who want to be cool. middle class, self-obsessed, lots of spare cash, identifiable lifestyles of conspicuous consumption. how are they not?


I could tell you if there was any actual content in that post there. Yuppies who want to be cool. Right, that narrows it down. Middle class, ditto. Self-obsessed. You mean like many activists tend to be? Identifiable lifestyles of conspicuous consumption = shopping in 2nd hand/vintage/retro shops? Flinging credit cards around Mayfair?

My point being (and nothing personal really) - hipsters is a meaningless term apart from its function as a placeholder for the sentiment "I don't like these people, I don't like what they're wearing, what they listen to, what they read and what they eat".


----------



## editor (Mar 27, 2013)

TruXta said:


> And in the years before?


One mention of the word in two months. Not much of an 'obsession' then.


----------



## pissflaps (Mar 27, 2013)

lazy stereotyping! it's what made this country great.


----------



## Chilavert (Mar 27, 2013)

Were those two people that came into the Albert asking about how noisy it was hipsters?


----------



## editor (Mar 27, 2013)

TruXta said:


> My point being (and nothing personal really) - hipsters is a meaningless term apart from its function as a placeholder for the sentiment "I don't like these people, I don't like what they're wearing, what they listen to, what they read and what they eat".


That's just lazy stereotyping. I don't dislike all hipsters and I almost certainly have some of their music in my collection (although not the insufferable, cabin-bound whiner Bon Iver). Some of the cameras are nice too, if perhaps underused. I can't get on with the trousers though.


----------



## editor (Mar 27, 2013)

Chilavert said:


> Were those two people that came into the Albert asking about how noisy it was hipsters?


Does it matter?


----------



## editor (Mar 27, 2013)

Chilavert said:


> Woolly hat with bobble (this must be perched on top of the wearer's head though, allowing the full forehead to be visible, ideally with forelock showing.


Damn. I've been wearing mine wrong all this time.


----------



## TruXta (Mar 27, 2013)

editor said:


> One mention of the word in two months. Not much of an 'obsession' then.


You don't have to use the word for us to know who you're on about you know. This whole thread and many others partly revolve around the issue of the changes we see happening to Brixton. You've often and vociferously blamed hipsters for some of the negative impacts you perceive. Yet when pressed you don't want to or can't identify who they are. Anyway, I'll leave it at that for now.


----------



## Rushy (Mar 27, 2013)

editor said:


> That's just lazy stereotyping. I don't dislike all hipsters and I almost certainly have some of their music in my collection (although not the insufferable, cabin-bound whiner Bon Iver). Some of the cameras are nice too, if perhaps underused. I can't get on with the trousers though.


 
Hipsterism is indeed quite unforgiving of the more muscular thighed amongst us.


----------



## pissflaps (Mar 27, 2013)

reminds me - a month or so ago, Mrs Flaps was perusing that chi-chi knick knack and macrobiotic greeting card store down one end of market row, and they were selling a hard copy version of this: http://hipsterhitler.com/ 

i asked the owner if he thought it was appropriate to be selling something like that in his shop and i got a self satisfied shrug and an eyeball roll for my troubles. 

if you're on here, you're a cunt.

because hitler, lol!


----------



## TruXta (Mar 27, 2013)

editor said:


> That's just lazy stereotyping. I don't dislike all hipsters and I almost certainly have some of their music in my collection (although not the insufferable, cabin-bound whiner Bon Iver). Some of the cameras are nice too, if perhaps underused. I can't get on with the trousers though.


I heartily agree about Bon Iver and the trousers. Only punks and speed-freaks should be allowed to wear skinny jeans.


----------



## Chilavert (Mar 27, 2013)

editor said:


> Does it matter?


Not really!

Perhaps I've misinterpreted some of your posts about 'incomers' to Brixton changing the area for the worse and taken that to mean hipsters. Clearly on reflection that is a very narrow definition.


----------



## editor (Mar 27, 2013)

TruXta said:


> You don't have to use the word for us to know who you're on about you know.


Ah, so in the absence of finding any actual examples of me 'obsessively' going "on and on" about them, you're now saying that I'm still talking about them anyway?  

For the record: that's bullshit and you're wrong. I'm not blaming hipsters for Foxtons, Brixton Square, vanishing affordable housing, the lack of new council housing, the eviction of the squats, the pricing out of small businesses or most of the other things that I feel have been instrumental in changing the character of Brixton for the worse.


----------



## Chilavert (Mar 27, 2013)

editor said:


> Damn. I've been wearing mine wrong all this time.


Me too.


----------



## editor (Mar 27, 2013)

Chilavert said:


> Not really!
> 
> Perhaps I've misinterpreted some of your posts about 'incomers' to Brixton changing the area for the worse and taken that to mean hipsters. Clearly on reflection that is a very narrow definition.


It is.

In fact, I'd prefer to have hipsters moving into the old squats in Coldharbour Lane than upwardly mobile professional types who I suspect will be quick to start lodging complaints about the noise coming from the oiks.


----------



## TruXta (Mar 27, 2013)

editor said:


> Ah, so in the absence of finding any actual examples of me 'obsessively' going "on and on" about them, you're now saying that I'm still talking about them anyway?
> 
> For the record: that's bullshit and you're wrong. I'm not blaming hipsters for Foxtons, Brixton Square, vanishing affordable housing, the lack of new council housing, the eviction of the squats, the pricing out of small businesses or most of the other things that I feel have been instrumental in changing the character of Brixton for the worse.


Ah, so the influx of hipsters has in your opinion had nothing to do with the rise of Brixton Village, which in its turn has not notched the pace of gentrification up, which again has nothing to do with Foxtons, Brixton Square etc? Golly, how could I be so wrong.


----------



## Rushy (Mar 27, 2013)

editor said:


> It is.
> 
> In fact, I'd prefer to have hipsters moving into the old squats in Coldharbour Lane than upwardly mobile professional types who I suspect will be quick to start lodging complaints about the noise coming from the oiks.


As Gramsci has pointed out - noise complaints do not just affect the wealthy. The professional classes, however, often feel more empowered or are less intimidated by a large corporate system such as that of the council.


----------



## cuppa tee (Mar 27, 2013)

Rushy said:


> As Gramsci has pointed out - noise complaints do not just affect the wealthy. The professional classes, however, often feel more empowered or are less intimidated by a large corporate system such as that of the council.


maybe the Council are also more inclined to indulge high band council tax payers


----------



## Rushy (Mar 27, 2013)

cuppa tee said:


> maybe the Council are also more inclined to indulge high band council tax payers


Well if that's the case places like the Albert and the 414 won't need to worry as the flats around there will almost certainly be in the bottom half of the tax band table - if not just the lowest three bands.

But I don't think you're right, since our council tax is in the upper half and I can't generally get a coherent response out of them.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 27, 2013)

el-ahrairah said:


> i think so. they're basically yuppies who want to be cool. middle class, self-obsessed, lots of spare cash, identifiable lifestyles of conspicuous consumption. how are they not?


 
Yuppies tended to be "professionals", though, and I don't think wearing skinny jeans, riding a fixie and toting an iPad are a profession, even when done with a nod to post-modern irony.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 27, 2013)

TruXta said:


> I heartily agree about Bon Iver and the trousers. Only punks and speed-freaks should be allowed to wear skinny jeans.


 
Speedfreaks only tended to wear skinny jeans because it was easier to shoplift from Mothercare than Debenhams.


----------



## TruXta (Mar 27, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Speedfreaks only tended to wear skinny jeans because it was easier to shoplift from Mothercare than Debenhams.


I defer to your obviously superiour knowledge on the topic.


----------



## Ozone (Mar 27, 2013)

editor said:


> One mention of the word in two months. Not much of an 'obsession' then.



Interestingly (or not!) a search brings up 789 posts with the word "hipster" in it, 79 of which are from the Editor, leaving 710 from the other uh 44 000 odd members of Urban75.

Make of it what you will....


----------



## editor (Mar 27, 2013)

Ozone said:


> Interestingly (or not!) a search brings up 789 posts with the word "hipster" in it, 79 of which are from the Editor, leaving 710 from the other uh 44 000 odd members of Urban75.
> 
> Make of it what you will....


Oh great. A stat man with time on his hands._ Fascinating._

Seeing as you're so interested, could you tell me how many of those posts are me typing out the word myself, as opposed to quoting something, or the word appearing in a quoted post? Just to make your pointless stats vaguely meaningful, like.


----------



## secateurz (Mar 27, 2013)

I think when the editor says hipster, he thinks of people like me : Spent less time in Brix than he has (only 5 years for me), younger, more disposable income and a  more corporate job.

Throw in the hive mind of the younger gen that will swarm to an 'in' area, order a burger and instagram it for their friends..and the green eyes/resentment/fear of change of those who feel a little displaced is there for all to see.


----------



## cuppa tee (Mar 27, 2013)

secateurz said:


> Throw in the hive mind of* the younger gen* that will swarm to an 'in' area, order a burger and instagram it for their friends..and the green eyes/resentment/fear of change of those who feel a little displaced is there for all to see.


 
is gen used as shorthand for generation or gentry in this context ?


----------



## editor (Mar 27, 2013)

secateurz said:


> I think when the editor says hipster, he thinks of people like me : Spent less time in Brix than he has (only 5 years for me), younger, more disposable income and a more corporate job.


Please don't try and project this drivel on to me. Thanks.


----------



## MillwallShoes (Mar 27, 2013)

blame the game, not the players.


----------



## gabi (Mar 27, 2013)

I don't think hipsters have anything to do with foxtons tbh. Most will be making 28k working for media agencies and as such the property ladders not an issue. 

We have clapham to blame for this shit. It's city workers. The sort of people who tuck in their shirts on weekends. We should reserve our hatred for this lot, not hipsters. 

And the suggestion that hipsters aren't politically interested which i vaguely saw mentioned up thread is absurd for anyone who has read the hipster bible, vice magazine (or seen any of their docos)


----------



## MillwallShoes (Mar 27, 2013)

gabi said:


> I don't think hipsters have anything to do with foxtons tbh. Most will be making 28k working for media agencies and as such the property ladders not an issue.
> 
> We have clapham to blame for this shit. It's city workers. The sort of people who tuck in their shirts on weekends. We should reserve our hatred for this lot, not hipsters.
> 
> And the suggestion that hipsters aren't politically interested which i vaguely saw mentioned up thread is absurd for anyone who has read the hipster bible, vice magazine (or seen any of their docos)


how can you blame anyone who moves there, really? if i earned a shit load of money, i'd live in somewhere desirable. they like it in brixton, so they move there...

blame the way the property market works, if anything - but even then, want can be done about it? towns where flats are priced at 150k and nothing above? it's irreversible in the current system. as i've said, and it's a bit glib, but "blame the game, not the players". i can't really resent anyone who earns enough dough to buy a nice flat. if i had the dough, i'd buy a nice house where i want to live, too.


----------



## MillwallShoes (Mar 27, 2013)

and ed, if you think this website doesnt have an influence on these things, you're naive! this website is the fifth result on a brixton google search! you rightly report how much of a great place it is, and people will be influenced by that.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 27, 2013)

What we need is someone to say _A man who, beyond the age of 26, finds himself on a *tube* can count himself as a failure. _

Maybe that will stop them all moving to Brixton because it has a tube station 

and yes, I know it wasn't Thatcher.  I've actually met people who refuse to go on buses as they're for the working class 

Wiki



> Attributed to her in Commons debates, 2003-07-02, column 407 and Commons debates, 2004-06-15 column 697. According to a letter to the _Daily Telegraph_ by Alistair Cooke on 2 November 2006, this sentiment originated with Loelia Ponsonby, one of the wives of 2nd Duke of Westminster who said "Anybody seen in a bus over the age of 30 has been a failure in life". In a letter published the next day, also in the _Daily Telegraph_, Hugo Vickers claims Loelia Ponsonby admitted to him that she had borrowed it from Brian Howard. There is no solid evidence that Margaret Thatcher ever quoted this statement with approval, or indeed shared the sentiment.
> 
> http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Margaret_Thatcher


----------



## Belushi (Mar 27, 2013)

> Residents woke up yesterday to the sight of "Yuppies Out" scrawled across the gleaming glass windows of the new branch of Foxtons estate agents in Brixton, south London.


 
Which of you was it? 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentis...ation-london-akin-social-cleansing?CMP=twt_gu


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 27, 2013)

MillwallShoes said:


> blame the game, not the players.


 
Haters gonna hate.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 27, 2013)

Belushi said:


> Which of you was it?
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentis...ation-london-akin-social-cleansing?CMP=twt_gu


 
Tragic



> Meanwhile, it seems that housing worries are not limited to those on low incomes, with the wife of Mark Carney, the new Bank of England governor, complaining that her family is struggling to find a place to live in London, despite his £874,000 pay packet and £5,000-a-week housing allowance.


 
FFS


----------



## MillwallShoes (Mar 27, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Haters gonna hate.


word.


----------



## leanderman (Mar 28, 2013)

MillwallShoes said:


> and ed, if you think this website doesnt have an influence on these things, you're naive! this website is the fifth result on a brixton google search! you rightly report how much of a great place it is, and people will be influenced by that.



In other news, I briefly met, literally, for the, like, first time, the editor in the Effra Social tonight.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 28, 2013)

Belushi said:


> Which of you was it?
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentis...ation-london-akin-social-cleansing?CMP=twt_gu


 
I looked up the Carpenters estate and found one of Lambeths esteemed officers , former Town Centre Manager , now at Newham doing her bit for residents:




> Jo Negrini, director of strategic regeneration, planning and Olympic Legacy with Newham Council, said that the decision to redevelop the estate rested with the council and not UCL.
> ‘It is not taking the flak for UCL. It is taking responsibility for the decision,’ she added. *‘The decision was taken by the council*.’


 
Well I suppose Newham has to "rebalance" its population even more so than Lambeth.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 28, 2013)

leanderman said:


> In other news, I briefly met, literally, for the, like, first time, the editor in the Effra Social tonight.


 
Awesome like


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 28, 2013)

leanderman said:


> In other news, I briefly met, literally, for the, like, first time, the editor in the Effra Social tonight.


 
and how was it for u?


----------



## editor (Mar 28, 2013)

MillwallShoes said:


> and ed, if you think this website doesnt have an influence on these things, you're naive! this website is the fifth result on a brixton google search! you rightly report how much of a great place it is, and people will be influenced by that.


Funny thing is that I've had more than a few emails complaining that my articles make Brixton look 'bad.' 

I'm at all not sure that all the articles I post up are unquestionably positive and loved up about Brixton either.


----------



## leanderman (Mar 28, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> and how was it for u?



Emotional


----------



## AprilNatalie (Mar 28, 2013)

At the end of the day, the way I see it is that its ridiculously territorial for anyone to make a comment on who moves into a certain area or not. So what if younger people are moving into a new area of London because it's increasing in popularity (and not to mention, in price) - if anything this reflects positively on the area itself. The same thing happened with East and is now happening in most of South London (Peckham is a prime example). Whether its 'hipsters', 'yuppies', 'chavs' or any other irrelevantly labeled person who chooses to move here isn't the issue in my opinion. All that Brixton stands to loose in this instance its cultural history, which ironically is one of the reason visitors prospective buyers are attracted to the area. So in this respect, yes I agree that perhaps the new Foxton's doesn't fit in. However, that's no reason to throw around stereotypes or labels of any kind, nor to act like anyone has any right to say who is allowed to move into the area or not. If we love Brixton and London in itself surely we should be proud that it is gaining recognition as a desirable place to be and to live.


----------



## editor (Mar 28, 2013)

AprilNatalie said:


> All that Brixton stands to loose in this instance its cultural history, which ironically is one of the reason visitors prospective buyers are attracted to the area.


I'm not entirely convinced that the majority of people now moving into Brixton are doing so because they are attracted to its 'cultural history'.

I'd say many are more attracted by what it has to offer _now_, as well as its proximity to central London, the Village, the trendy bars, the excellent transport links and the fact that it's it's seen as a 'nicer' and 'safer' place to live than in the past.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 28, 2013)

AprilNatalie said:


> However, that's no reason to throw around stereotypes or labels of any kind, nor to act like anyone has any right to say who is allowed to move into the area or not. If we love Brixton and London in itself surely we should be proud that it is gaining recognition as a desirable place to be and to live.


....except the have-nots, whose families have been here for generations in some cases, are being swept away because they can't afford to stay.


----------



## AprilNatalie (Mar 28, 2013)

editor said:


> I'm not entirely convinced that the majority of people now moving into Brixton are doing so because they are attracted to its 'cultural history'.
> 
> I'd say many are more attracted by what it has to offer _now_, as well as its proximity to central London, the Village, the trendy bars, the excellent transport links and the fact that it's it's seen as a 'nicer' and 'safer' place to live than in the past.


 
As I said, its 'one of the reasons'. Personally having been brought up in Putney and being of Caribbean heritage, I found it incredibly refreshing to experience an area where culture is so prominent and diverse, and I'm pretty sure that a lot of other people feel the same way. What I was trying to say is that all these new things that Brixton has to offer can only stand as positives, however the main thing that Brixton has to lose in this situation is its authenticity.



Mrs Magpie said:


> ....except the have-nots, whose families have been here for generations in some cases, are being swept away because they can't afford to stay.


 
This is a fair point, however it's important to bear in mind that half the reason Brixton has such a diverse mix of cultures and races is because of the influx of immigrants during the 1940s and 50s, and I'm sure the previous residents during that time had similar views as the ones people seem to be making now - not to mention using race in an accusatory way similarly to how the blame is solely put upon 'hipsters', 'yuppies' and 'city slickers'. As an young art student I probably fall into the category of 'hipsters', yet being a South Londoner since birth I have a problem with being blamed for 'families being swept away' simply because of my lifestyle and fashion choices.


----------



## leanderman (Mar 28, 2013)

Are the families 'being swept away' those in private rented accommodation? Surely those in social housing have some form of protection against the high rents all across London?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 28, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Are the families 'being swept away' those in private rented accommodation? Surely those in social housing have some form of protection against the high rents all across London?


Housing Association rents are pegged to market rent. I'm in social housing and a couple of years ago my rent went up by 80 squid a month. Considering my take-home pay was under £800 a month you can see the difficulty. My rent goes up every year.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 28, 2013)

I would add, there's quite a complicated formula in calculating rent rises in housing association properties. Although popular belief is that social housing rents are subsidised, they're not. They make a profit which is ploughed back into the housing association. It could be argued that with tax breaks, buy-to-let landlords are subsidised. It's the private landlords that are really making a killing and of course the law of supply and demand means that, for instance, rents in Brixton are silly whereas rents in say, Hull, are not.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 28, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> I would add, there's quite a complicated formula in calculating rent rises in housing association properties. Although popular belief is that social housing rents are subsidised, they're not. They make a profit which is ploughed back into the housing association. It could be argued that with tax breaks, buy-to-let landlords are subsidised. It's the private landlords that are really making a killing and of course the law of supply and demand means that, for instance, rents in Brixton are silly whereas rents in say, Hull, are not.


Although I expect a lot of people in hull think their rents are silly


----------



## Greebo (Mar 28, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> Although I expect a lot of people in hull think their rents are silly


Relative to the level of local earnings, they probably are.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 28, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> Although I expect a lot of people in hull think their rents are silly


Paging longdog


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 28, 2013)

Greebo said:


> Relative to the level of local earnings, they probably are.


I suspect though, not as silly as in the South East. Average earnings are really bumped up by people in extremely well-paid (some might say overpaid) jobs. meanwhile there are so many people doing high-value, low-paid jobs who are really struggling to keep their heads above water.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 28, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Are the families 'being swept away' those in private rented accommodation? Surely those in social housing have some form of protection against the high rents all across London?


Oh, I wish it were so. Yes, swept away is what's happening....
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/mar/27/reconfiguration-london-akin-social-cleansing


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 28, 2013)

....It's like American multi-millionaires planted an idea in the minds of the powers that be.....




			
				Evening Standard in 2002 said:
			
		

> Madonna says she loves living in London - except for all the council housing.
> The singer, who has lived in her luxury Kensington home for three years, said she was in awe of the capital's architecture and its fantastic gardens. 'I love the way the city looks, minus all the council estates randomly and profusely built up everywhere,' she told Vanity Fair magazine.
> She also complained there was no way to get builders to work on Saturdays.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 28, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> ....It's like American multi-millionaires planted an idea in the minds of the powers that be.....


so she was also instrumental in helping poland's bid to join the eu.


----------



## MillwallShoes (Mar 28, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> ....It's like American multi-millionaires planted an idea in the minds of the powers that be.....


should be bared from the country.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 28, 2013)

MillwallShoes said:


> should be bared from the country.


She's done a bit too much baring if you ask me.


----------



## TonyH82 (Mar 28, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> ....except the have-nots, whose families have been here for generations in some cases, are being swept away because they can't afford to stay.


 
It is not just the "have-nots" who are suffering from this. London is getting more and more expensive and people are having to look elsewhere for a suitable place to live.

Many of the so-called "yuppies" who are moving to Brixton are just normal people, working normal jobs, who are trying to get on with their lives.

It is not the fault of Foxtons / Honest Burgers / Yuppies that successive governments have done nothing to encourage house building in the capital. But whoever vandalised that window is too stupid to put the blame where it belongs...


----------



## secateurz (Mar 28, 2013)

so the have nots are complaining that the have mores are, entirely fairly, moving to an area they happen to live in and paying rents dictated by market forces. I am sorry but I find the idea that a 24 year old graduate earning 26k that wants to move here is getting grief utterley appaling.

I mean really?!? its everybody elses fault that you cant afford to live here? move OUT OF ZONE 2 ON THE FRICKIN VICTORIA LINE

(in more extreme examples) why should the tax payer pay for people to live in areas they they themselves couldnt afford to live? it boggles my mind


----------



## TruXta (Mar 28, 2013)

secateurz said:


> so the have nots are complaining that the have mores are, entirely fairly, moving to an area they happen to live in and paying rents dictated by market forces. I am sorry but I find the idea that a 24 year old graduate earning 26k that wants to move here is getting grief utterley appaling.
> 
> I mean really?!? its everybody elses fault that you cant afford to live here? move OUT OF ZONE 2 ON THE FRICKIN VICTORIA LINE
> 
> (in more extreme examples) why should the tax payer pay for people to live in areas they they themselves couldnt afford to live? it boggles my mind


Show's the expansiveness of your mind more than anything else. Moron.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 28, 2013)

secateurz said:


> so the have nots are complaining that the have mores are, entirely fairly, moving to an area they happen to live in and paying rents dictated by market forces. I am sorry but I find the idea that a 24 year old graduate earning 26k that wants to move here is getting grief utterley appaling.
> 
> I mean really?!? its everybody elses fault that you cant afford to live here? move OUT OF ZONE 2 ON THE FRICKIN VICTORIA LINE
> 
> (in more extreme examples) why should the tax payer pay for people to live in areas they they themselves couldnt afford to live? it boggles my mind


i see you've been a member since last november 18. i wouldn't bet on seeing april 18 as a member if i were you.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 28, 2013)

secateurz said:


> so the have nots are complaining that the have mores are, entirely fairly, moving to an area they happen to live in and paying rents dictated by market forces. I am sorry but I find the idea that a 24 year old graduate earning 26k that wants to move here is getting grief utterley appaling.
> 
> I mean really?!? its everybody elses fault that you cant afford to live here? move OUT OF ZONE 2 ON THE FRICKIN VICTORIA LINE
> 
> (in more extreme examples) why should the tax payer pay for people to live in areas they they themselves couldnt afford to live? it boggles my mind


given that EVERYONE pays tax, be they rich, poor or middling, could you perhaps rethink your sentence 'why should the tax payer pay for people to live in area they themselves couldn't afford to?'


----------



## ddraig (Mar 28, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Show's the expansiveness of your mind more than anything else. Moron.


 think you meant Moran!


----------



## Chilavert (Mar 28, 2013)

secateurz said:


> so the have nots are complaining that the have mores are, entirely fairly, moving to an area they happen to live in and paying rents dictated by market forces. I am sorry but I find the idea that a 24 year old graduate earning 26k that wants to move here is getting grief utterley appaling.
> 
> I mean really?!? its everybody elses fault that you cant afford to live here? move OUT OF ZONE 2 ON THE FRICKIN VICTORIA LINE
> 
> (in more extreme examples) why should the tax payer pay for people to live in areas they they themselves couldnt afford to live? it boggles my mind


Successful wind-ups generally need to be more subtle than this, but I admire your effort anyway.


----------



## leanderman (Mar 28, 2013)

There probably is though a serious point to be made about housing benefit, aka the landlord's subsidy. 

I resent public money going to private landlords.


----------



## editor (Mar 28, 2013)

leanderman said:


> There probably is though a serious point to be made about housing benefit, aka the landlord's subsidy.
> 
> I resent public money going to private landlords.


When I was on the dole it struck me as utter madness that a landlord can charge an inflated rent safe in the knowledge that the dole would pay it. Effectively, it was taxpayers giving landlords money for providing shit, overpriced housing. 

Another reason why council housing should be built.


----------



## editor (Mar 28, 2013)

secateurz said:


> so the have nots are complaining that the have mores are, entirely fairly, moving to an area they happen to live in and paying rents dictated by market forces. I am sorry but I find the idea that a 24 year old graduate earning 26k that wants to move here is getting grief utterley appaling.
> 
> I mean really?!? its everybody elses fault that you cant afford to live here? move OUT OF ZONE 2 ON THE FRICKIN VICTORIA LINE
> 
> (in more extreme examples) why should the tax payer pay for people to live in areas they they themselves couldnt afford to live? it boggles my mind


So you're all for communities being torn asunder in the name of private profit?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 28, 2013)

Foxtrolls


----------



## Winot (Mar 28, 2013)

Put on your Foxgloves before touching.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 28, 2013)

secateurz said:


> (in more extreme examples) why should the tax payer pay for people to live in areas they they themselves couldnt afford to live? it boggles my mind


 
Well with reasoning like that, I could ask why I should be paying taxes that are given away as child benefit when I don't have any children myself

Idiot


----------



## Belushi (Mar 28, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Well with reasoning like that, I could ask why I should be paying taxes that are given away as child benefit when I don't have any children myself
> 
> Idiot


 
And why am I FORCED pay for a Fire Service I've never once had to use!!!


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 28, 2013)

Belushi said:


> And why am I FORCED pay for a Fire Service I've never once had to use!!!


 
*sets fire to Belushi's bum*


----------



## Libertad (Mar 28, 2013)

*Sets fire to hospital children's library*


----------



## secateurz (Mar 28, 2013)

leanderman said:


> There probably is though a serious point to be made about housing benefit, aka the landlord's subsidy.
> 
> I resent public money going to private landlords.


 
I totally agree


----------



## simonSW2 (Mar 28, 2013)

secateurz said:


> it boggles my mind


 
Minds too lazy to engage are very easily boggled.


----------



## secateurz (Mar 28, 2013)

I love all this use of "like"ing posts.

We live in different worlds clearly, but it takes all sorts


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 28, 2013)

AprilNatalie said:


> At the end of the day, the way I see it is that its ridiculously territorial for anyone to make a comment on who moves into a certain area or not. So what if younger people are moving into a new area of London because it's increasing in popularity (and not to mention, in price) - if anything this reflects positively on the area itself. The same thing happened with East and is now happening in most of South London (Peckham is a prime example). Whether its 'hipsters', 'yuppies', 'chavs' or any other irrelevantly labeled person who chooses to move here isn't the issue in my opinion. All that Brixton stands to loose in this instance its cultural history, which ironically is one of the reason visitors prospective buyers are attracted to the area. So in this respect, yes I agree that perhaps the new Foxton's doesn't fit in. However, that's no reason to throw around stereotypes or labels of any kind, nor to act like anyone has any right to say who is allowed to move into the area or not. If we love Brixton and London in itself surely we should be proud that it is gaining recognition as a desirable place to be and to live.


 
It kind of depends on your social location as to whether you'll view the gaining of recognition as particularly worthy of pride. For some of us it's part of a gradual residualisation of "the lower orders" in parts of London that have been our homes for 50 years or more into ever-shrinking ghettoes of social housing. *Then*, it's not something to feel good about, because it's another sign that your stay has got more tenuous.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 28, 2013)

AprilNatalie said:


> As I said, its 'one of the reasons'. Personally having been brought up in Putney and being of Caribbean heritage, I found it incredibly refreshing to experience an area where culture is so prominent and diverse, and I'm pretty sure that a lot of other people feel the same way.


 
Lived above the White Lion on Putney High Street between 1968 and 1970. It was well scummy back then. 



> What I was trying to say is that all these new things that Brixton has to offer can only stand as positives, however the main thing that Brixton has to lose in this situation is its authenticity.


 
And yet that's what Brixton is often being "sold" on - the "authenticity" of the cultural environment. Unfortunately that same environment is being constantly eroded by multinationals chasing the gentrifiers, and people who feel "inauthentic" or whose own cultural background doesn't seem "vibrant" enough moving here in order to imbibe some of that culture and/or bathe in its' reflected glory, as it were.




> This is a fair point, however it's important to bear in mind that half the reason Brixton has such a diverse mix of cultures and races is because of the influx of immigrants during the 1940s and 50s, and I'm sure the previous residents during that time had similar views as the ones people seem to be making now - not to mention using race in an accusatory way similarly to how the blame is solely put upon 'hipsters', 'yuppies' and 'city slickers'. As an young art student I probably fall into the category of 'hipsters', yet being a South Londoner since birth I have a problem with being blamed for 'families being swept away' simply because of my lifestyle and fashion choices.


TBF, Brixton in the '30s was more fixated on whether people were Jews or not, often not a visible marker of "race" in the way skin colour was for the Windrush generation and later. You mostly only got shit if you *looked* Jewish, apparently. Crap for the Orthodox, but not too much of a hassle for my Gentile-looking gran and her family.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 28, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Are the families 'being swept away' those in private rented accommodation? Surely those in social housing have some form of protection against the high rents all across London?


 
*Better* protection, definitely, although on current form it looks like local authorities will attempt, via "joint developments" to renovate social housing/decant, demolish and rebuild (see Cressingham Gardens and Myatts Fields threads) to impose new tenancy conitions that are less favourable, with less secure tenure.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 28, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> I suspect though, not as silly as in the South East. Average earnings are really bumped up by people in extremely well-paid (some might say overpaid) jobs. meanwhile there are so many people doing high-value, low-paid jobs who are really struggling to keep their heads above water.


 
My uncle in Norwich couldn't believe it a few years back that the rent on his 3-bed council house with garden was only a third as much again (£120 a week) as the rent for my 1-bed flat with no garden (about £90 a week at the time).


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 28, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> *Better* protection, definitely, although on current form it looks like local authorities will attempt, via "joint developments" to renovate social housing/decant, demolish and rebuild (see Cressingham Gardens and Myatts Fields threads) to impose new tenancy conitions that are less favourable, with less secure tenure.


....and that's a situation with council versus Housing Associations as well. To get somewhere that was suitable for a Guide Dog we had to trade down from a Secure Tenancy to an Assured Tenancy, and take a rent hike from one to t'other as well. Plus my husband, despite being the 'vulnerable' one is not, and cannot be on this tenancy, it's in my name so we are in the position that if I died tomorrow three people would lose their home. I've told them all if I die tomorrow to hide my body so they can stay housed. I'm only half-joking about that.


----------



## longdog (Mar 28, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Paging longdog


 
£60 per week for a good sized 1 bedroom flat.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 28, 2013)

I'm pretty sure round these parts a one bed flat is double that.


----------



## colacubes (Mar 28, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> I'm pretty sure round these parts a one bed flat is double that.


 
I know someone paying nearly £180 for a studio (Housing Association I think).  She's moving out of Brixton next month


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 28, 2013)

I was close, just rang someone. £101 but with a minuscule kitchen as in can't open the oven door without standing aside.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 28, 2013)

that's Council, btw, not HA.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 28, 2013)

secateurz said:


> I think when the editor says hipster, he thinks of people like me : Spent less time in Brix than he has (only 5 years for me), younger, more disposable income and a more corporate job.
> 
> Throw in the hive mind of the younger gen that will swarm to an 'in' area, order a burger and instagram it for their friends..and the green eyes/resentment/fear of change of those who feel a little displaced is there for all to see.


 
You think this is a joke? I have people I know pushed out of Brixton. I am next on list. So my time here is limited.

Perhaps people like me might do more than green eyed resentment.

You talk of younger generation. Which one is that? Young generation are not just you and people u know.

I have friends who are younger than me and they do not go on like you.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 28, 2013)

AprilNatalie said:


> At the end of the day, the way I see it is that its ridiculously territorial for anyone to make a comment on who moves into a certain area or not. So what if younger people are moving into a new area of London because it's increasing in popularity (and not to mention, in price) - if anything this reflects positively on the area itself. The same thing happened with East and is now happening in most of South London (Peckham is a prime example). Whether its 'hipsters', 'yuppies', 'chavs' or any other irrelevantly labeled person who chooses to move here isn't the issue in my opinion. All that Brixton stands to loose in this instance its cultural history, which ironically is one of the reason visitors prospective buyers are attracted to the area. So in this respect, yes I agree that perhaps the new Foxton's doesn't fit in. However, that's no reason to throw around stereotypes or labels of any kind, nor to act like anyone has any right to say who is allowed to move into the area or not. If we love Brixton and London in itself surely we should be proud that it is gaining recognition as a desirable place to be and to live.


 
I have lived in Brixton for years. I always thought it was a desirable place to live. I do not need/ never have needed Brixton to be validated by anyone else.

You mention East End. Like Brixton the issue is not change but the fact that in near future it will be simply unaffordable for new people to come to parts of London unless they are well off.

So my criticism of what is happening to London is that its gradually becoming a playground for the well off.

Immigration from other parts of UK and abroad has made London and Brixton what it is. Its not cultural history that will be lost. Its the essence of London as a place where people from different cultures and histories can live side by side. London is unique in that sense imo compared to other cities.

There is an issue of who a City is for. How can cities provide an environment for where change is possible. Many people come to cities to find more freedom in there lives. Gay people did find this in London for example in 70s .I think this freedom is gradually being closed down. A city needs to be made affordable for all to retain this freedom.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 28, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> A city needs to be made affordable for all to retain this freedom.


Affordable in the real sense, not what developers regard as affordable.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 28, 2013)

AprilNatalie said:


> This is a fair point, however it's important to bear in mind that half the reason Brixton has such a diverse mix of cultures and races is because of the influx of immigrants during the 1940s and 50s, and I'm sure the previous residents during that time had similar views as the ones people seem to be making now - not to mention using race in an accusatory way similarly to how the blame is solely put upon 'hipsters', 'yuppies' and 'city slickers'. As an young art student I probably fall into the category of 'hipsters', yet being a South Londoner since birth I have a problem with being blamed for 'families being swept away' simply because of my lifestyle and fashion choices.


 
The blame is being put solely on hipsters?

I think you need to look up my posts. I post up here about housing/ "regeneration" etc. Among other topics.

You are making a generalization.

 I remember the 70s and 80s. Racism was more than saying some unkind words about "hipsters". You cannot make an equivalence between the two. Racism is about something someone cannot help- the colour of there skin. Race is not the same as lifestyle and fashion choices.

I also think you are forgetting that back in 70s and 80s black and white communities often found themselves on the same side. ie opposing the police (Thatchers Army).


----------



## editor (Mar 29, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> I'm pretty sure round these parts a one bed flat is double that.


Triple more like


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

editor said:


> Triple more like


I know I pay more in rent for a very small house than my sister is for a mortgage for a large 5 bed place up north


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 29, 2013)

AprilNatalie said:


> This is a fair point, however it's important to bear in mind that half the reason Brixton has such a diverse mix of cultures and races is because of the influx of immigrants during the 1940s and 50s, and I'm sure the previous residents during that time had similar views as the ones people seem to be making now - not to mention using race in an accusatory way similarly to how the blame is solely put upon 'hipsters', 'yuppies' and 'city slickers'. As an young art student I probably fall into the category of 'hipsters', yet being a South Londoner since birth I have a problem with being blamed for 'families being swept away' simply because of my lifestyle and fashion choices.


 
I know someone who is Black British ( second generation) who now lives in South London. He regularly complains to me about Somalis and Poles coming here and living near him. Particularly Poles as they are not in the Commonwealth (his parents came from Carribbean). So he does not understand why they are allowed to live here permanently. ( He does have a point there. Commonwealth citizens did have right to come here that was gradually restricted. Commonwealth was supposed to have freedom of movement).

So yes some people do not like change.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 29, 2013)

AprilNatalie said:


> As I said, its 'one of the reasons'. Personally having been brought up in Putney and being of Caribbean heritage, I found it incredibly refreshing to experience an area where culture is so prominent and diverse, and I'm pretty sure that a lot of other people feel the same way. What I was trying to say is that all these new things that Brixton has to offer can only stand as positives, however the main thing that Brixton has to lose in this situation is its authenticity.
> 
> .


 
Chatting to a  Black guy I know recently. ( born in Brixton of Carribbean heritage). He did not have your confidence in the "positives". His view was that by the time the Black Cultural Archives building is finished there will not be any Black people left in Brixton with the way things are going.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 29, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> I know someone who is Black British ( second generation) who now lives in South London. He regularly complains to me about Somalis and Poles coming here and living near him. Particularly Poles as they are not in the Commonwealth (his parents came from Carribbean). So he does not understand why they are allowed to live here permanently. ( He does have a point there. Commonwealth citizens did have right to come here that was gradually restricted. Commonwealth was supposed to have freedom of movement).
> 
> So yes some people do not like change.


 
Did you point out that the Polish WWII connection?


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 29, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> It kind of depends on your social location as to whether you'll view the gaining of recognition as particularly worthy of pride. For some of us it's part of a gradual residualisation of "the lower orders" in parts of London that have been our homes for 50 years or more into ever-shrinking ghettoes of social housing. *Then*, it's not something to feel good about, because it's another sign that your stay has got more tenuous.


 
And unlike other cities London was less segregated according to wealth. That is changing. See this article:




> Last week, Darren Johnson, one of the Green Party’s members in the London assembly, claimed that new housing benefit figures showed rising numbers of low income families being priced out of Inner London. The changes are striking, but there are emerging differences within areas as well as between them.
> 
> The is a clear indication from these trends that whilst people on low incomes are able to cope with having their housing benefit restricted to the cheapest 30% of properties, when the level is set even lower than this they cannot. *It appears that the national cap is making parts of London a no-go zone for people on low incomes.*


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

Some of the bravest WWII pilots were Afro-Caribbean and Polish. Not to mention soldiers and sailors as well.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 29, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Did you point out that the Polish WWII connection?


 
I did. I did point out that we are in Europe. And have always been part of Europe. He did not get it. I think he looked at UK as country that used to have empire. That those who were in it should be allowed here.

Its not a strong argument to use. Hungary and Romania did not have a WW2 that they would want to remember. But they are entitled to come here as much as Poles.

Some Indians fought with the Japanese against the British. As they saw the UK as imperialist. Hoped Japanese would help them liberate India from imperialist rule. WW2 is looked at from hindsight.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 29, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> I did. I did point out that we are in Europe. And have always been part of Europe. He did not get it. I think he looked at UK as country that used to have empire. That those who were in it should be allowed here.
> 
> Its not a strong argument to use. Hungary and Romania did not have a WW2 that they would want to remember. But they are entitled to come here as much as Poles.


 
So if he's got a problem with the Polish, what does he think about the Gurkhas then?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 29, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> Its not a strong argument to use. Hungary and Romania did not have a WW2 that they would want to remember. But they are entitled to come here as much as Poles.


 
Suppose so, but sometimes you just have to use what you've got


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 29, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> So if he's got a problem with the Polish, what does he think about the Gurkhas then?


 
Well the Poles hang around drinking outside in his street. No Gurkhas in his street. So no problem.

(zywiec or tyskie is rather good)


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 29, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> Well the Poles hang around drinking outside in his street. No Gurkhas in his street. So no problem.
> 
> (zywiec or tyskie is rather good)


 
I wouldn't want to mug anyone if I knew there were Gurkhas hanging around my street.  We should have more of them!


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 29, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I wouldn't want to mug anyone if I knew there were Gurkhas hanging around my street. We should have more of them!


 
Joanna Lumley has made sure there will be more Gurkhas.


----------



## mxh (Mar 29, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> His view was that by the time the Black Cultural Archives building is finished there will not be any Black people left in Brixton with the way things are going.


 
By the time this is built none of us will still be alive.


----------



## TonyH82 (Mar 29, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> Chatting to a Black guy I know recently. ( born in Brixton of Carribbean heritage). He did not have your confidence in the "positives". His view was that by the time the Black Cultural Archives building is finished there will not be any Black people left in Brixton with the way things are going.


 
I'm moving into Brixton Square soon with my girlfriend (who is black). She wants to know if she will be the only black person in the village?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> Chatting to a Black guy I know recently. ( born in Brixton of Carribbean heritage). He did not have your confidence in the "positives". His view was that by the time the Black Cultural Archives building is finished there will not be any Black people left in Brixton with the way things are going.


Wouldn't surprise me. 
Of course, perhaps for some new arrivals, a working-class Brixton of blacks, whites, Poles, Portugeuse, Brazilians, Estonians and every other nationality is a little *too* "authentic"?


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> You think this is a joke? I have people I know pushed out of Brixton. I am next on list. So my time here is limited.
> 
> Perhaps people like me might do more than green eyed resentment.
> 
> ...


 
come to West Norwood


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> come to West Norwood


 
and how long do you think it'll be before West Norwood becomes unaffordable?


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

12 months


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> 12 months


 
so what are people expected to do, move outwards further and further out of London every 12 months, until the cost of commuting means they can't afford to get to their jobs?


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

people who cant afford to keep up? well yes. what can the government do? London has gained over a million people in recent years and stands to gain millions more. Its a global city that attracts the super rich, to the destitiute and everybody in between...opportunities and jobs are rife here. 

if they raise interest rates it will crush people (though reward savers I guess) and lose them votes.

One thing they could/should do...is tax second, third + home owners. Renting out property gives 5%+ returns in a low return environment.   Or we could become like Germany where renting is (a) not looked down upon and (b) closely controlled to be affordable for all.  Infact thinking about it we need to be more like Germany.

West Norwood is a more extreme example because of the new school/cinema/leisure centre/proximity to brix/dulwich etc


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> so what are people expected to do, move outwards further and further out of London every 12 months, until the cost of commuting means they can't afford to get to their jobs?


 
or they downsize? or make compromises? not have a smart phone? or sky?

jesus poverty in this country is an arbitrary relative target set by the government.

 trust me, things are only going to get worse over the next 5 years....the fact stock markets are at an all time high means nothing, its all engineered by the governments around the world and cannot be sustained. it will all come crashing down, a great leveller for our generation.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> or they downsize? or make compromises? not have a smart phone? or sky?


 
Oh do fuck right off.  There's plenty that have neither a smart phone or Sky

What should they cut down on?


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Mar 29, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Oh do fuck right off.  There's plenty that have neither a smart phone or Sky
> 
> What should they cut down on?


 
Plus a smart phone won't make a dent in the rent anyway, even on the cheapest places. It's like the flat screen TV thing (or 'TV's as they're known now), people try and make out it's like owning a Porsche or something. 

Can't pay the rent? Get rid of the TV and phone. What about next month?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Oh do fuck right off.  There's plenty that have neither a smart phone or Sky
> 
> What should they cut down on?


I don't have any mobile, nor indeed a telly. Or benefits. I do however know someone who has wrongly been cut off ESA with no warning and been told they'll have to put in a new claim which will take two months and they aren't entitled to a crisis loan. Should they eat their cat?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 29, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> I don't have any mobile, nor indeed a telly. Or benefits. I do however know someone who has wrongly been cut off ESA with no warning and been told they'll have to put in a new claim which will take two months and they aren't entitled to a crisis loan. Should they eat their cat?


 
I reckon secateurz would save it's a good idea as it would save on pet food and vet bills


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 29, 2013)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Plus a smart phone won't make a dent in the rent anyway, even on the cheapest places. It's like the flat screen TV thing (or 'TV's as they're known now), people try and make out it's like owning a Porsche or something.
> 
> Can't pay the rent? Get rid of the TV and phone. What about next month?


 
Yes, don't think people realise how much you'd get for a secondhand tv, or how cheap some of them are to buy in the first place, or that it may have been a present and you didn't spend your benefits on it or that you may have bought it when you were working


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> I don't have any mobile, nor indeed a telly. Or benefits. I do however know someone who has wrongly been cut off ESA with no warning and been told they'll have to put in a new claim which will take two months and they aren't entitled to a crisis loan. Should they eat their cat?


 
crime? street corner? job? second job? busking? further education? volunteering? mentoring?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> crime?


I've given them your address as per your inspired suggestion.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

I hope you're well versed in the ancient art of martial crutches.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> crime? street corner?


 
and then you'd be on here objecting to the rise in crime



> job? second job? busking?


 
There's probably a reason they're on ESA or did you miss that part?



> further education? volunteering? mentoring


 
and volunteering and further education will put money in their pockets will it?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

It's OK they're on their way round secateurz place to relieve him of his worldlies.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 29, 2013)

Good


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> or they downsize? or make compromises? not have a smart phone? or sky?


 
That's right, roll out those tabloid tropes. 



> jesus poverty in this country is an arbitrary relative target set by the government.


 
Nope, the actual poverty figure (40% of the average wage or less per household) isn't an arbitrary target set by the government, although promises to lift _X_ number of people out of poverty are.



> trust me, things are only going to get worse over the next 5 years....the fact stock markets are at an all time high means nothing...


 
You don't say!!!  

In fact, stock markets riding high usually *do* signify *something* generally an over-confident buyers' market.



> ...its all engineered by the governments around the world and cannot be sustained.


 
You twat! 
One thing it *isn't* is "engineered by the governments". All the governments do is ride the coat-tails of finance and business. Anything they "engineer" is only with the permission of their paymasters. They direct *nothing*.



> it will all come crashing down, a great leveller for our generation.


 
Wrong again.
Study some history, specifically the history of market failures in the last 150 years. There's one consistent thread.
I'll even tell you what it is - it's that the wealthy mostly keep what they should by rights lose, and that the responsibility for rebuilding the economy falls mostly on those that aren't wealthy. Nothing will "level". All that will happen is that the poor will become poorer, and the wealthy will scrabble harder than ever to escape taxation.


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

I love this use of bold! if you are dependent on the state, like you clearly are, then what happened to being grateful for what you are given? when is it enough? if you have to be moved to a less expensive area wouldnt you be glad for the roof over your head?

Central bank intervention across the world has got the stock markets to these levels, I dont care what you say. You are not always right.

My leveller comment wasnt aimed at the super wealthy, it was aimed at everybody else. house prices will fall when it all pops. it is your belief that I am wrong, but that necessarily make it so. and your use of bold just makes you like a try hard forum warrior, well versed with too much time on your hands. which is apt.


----------



## editor (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> I love this use of bold! if you are dependent on the state, like you clearly are, then what happened to being grateful for what you are given?


It's not being "given" if you've worked and put money in to the system. It's what you're _entitled_ to.

In fact, you're entitled to it, full stop.


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

Fair enough. What if you havent worked? Or what if you take out more than you put in?


----------



## editor (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> Fair enough. What if you havent worked? Or what if you take out more than you put in?


You're still entitled to it, just the same as you're entitled to NHS health care regardless of whether you're a millionaire or a pauper.


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

also fair enough. Is that right? sustainable? does it matter given the mahoosive miss allocation of spending across the gvmnt anyway ?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

Bloody Hell. Just found another sodding letter from fucking Foxtons lurking by the mat. Must have missed it yesterday. I think this year's 26% rise in Amazon deforestation must be down to them the rate of wasted paper they cause.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> I love this use of bold! if you are dependent on the state, like you clearly are, then what happened to being grateful for what you are given? when is it enough? if you have to be moved to a less expensive area wouldnt you be glad for the roof over your head?
> 
> Central bank intervention across the world has got the stock markets to these levels, I dont care what you say. You are not always right.
> 
> My leveller comment wasnt aimed at the super wealthy, it was aimed at everybody else. house prices will fall when it all pops. it is your belief that I am wrong, but that necessarily make it so. and your use of bold just makes you like a try hard forum warrior, well versed with too much time on your hands. which is apt.


 
You speak as if all these people on benefits have *never *paid into the system


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> Fair enough. What if you havent worked? Or what if you take out more than you put in?


 
Well that depends on what you consider work doesn't it.  What exactly do you consider work?


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

*haha*

I cant see where I put that in my post.


----------



## editor (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> also fair enough. Is that right? sustainable? does it matter given the mahoosive miss allocation of spending across the gvmnt anyway ?


Are massive profits, huge bonuses and tax-dodging big earners sustainable?


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Well that depends on what you consider work doesn't it. What exactly do you consider work?


 
something where you pay tax and national insurance? how are you confused?


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

editor said:


> Are massive profits, huge bonuses and tax-dodging big earners sustainable?


 
Profits are fine, bonuses are fine, tax dodging is not fine.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> something where you pay tax and national insurance? how are you confused?


 
So what about someone who has a disabled child and stays at home taking care of child?  Or someone else who gives up work to take care of someone?


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

in that very specific example they should get all the support they need from the government, that social safety net should never EVER go away


----------



## editor (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> Profits are fine, bonuses are fine, tax dodging is not fine.


So you don't have a problem with, say, a company director scooping a £10m bonus for himself, while some of the workers in his company are struggling on the minimum wage?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> in that very specific example they should get all the support they need from the government, that social safety net should never EVER go away


 
Well yes, but do you say that because carers are saving the country almost *£120bn *a year so it suits you?

http://www.carersuk.org/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=2121&Itemid=8


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

editor said:


> So you don't have a problem with, say, a company director scooping a £10m bonus for himself, while some of the workers in his company are struggling on the minimum wage?


 
Granted you lot are, once again, picking an extreme example to make your point here?

do I have a problem with a capitalistic system that, on occasion, lets grossly unfair greed occur?  No problem at all, rather this than Socialism.


----------



## el-ahrairah (Mar 29, 2013)

nobber.


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Well yes, but do you say that because carers are saving the country almost *£120bn *a year so it suits you?
> 
> http://www.carersuk.org/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=2121&Itemid=8


 
carer with bee in bonnet ramming point home over and over again?

Picking one thing, to combat a much broader point, is forum bullshit bingo.  you are of course right?

Its like me saying I like doctors. and you lot saying you like doctors, EVEN though Harold Shipman was a doctor?!?!


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> Granted you lot are, once again, picking an extreme example to make your point here?
> 
> do I have a problem with a capitalistic system that, on occasion, lets grossly unfair greed occur? No problem at all, rather this than Socialism.


 
It's *not *extreme.  There are thousands of disabled people unable to work, there are thousands of carers saving the country £120 BILLION, and there are thousands of people who do work, cleaning the toilets, serving the meals and emptying the bins of people richer than them


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> carer with bee in bonnet ramming point home over and over again?


 
Maybe, but it's obviously not getting into your thick skull is it


----------



## editor (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> Granted you lot are, once again, picking an extreme example to make your point here?
> 
> do I have a problem with a capitalistic system that, on occasion, lets grossly unfair greed occur? No problem at all, rather this than Socialism.


Here's the reality of the situation. Read it well:


> The claim that the richest 1% have everything while the poorest 99% have next to nothing is not just hot air. In the US, the share of national income going to the wealthiest 1% has doubled since 1980 to 20%. For the top 0.01%, it has quadrupled to levels never seen before. A report published by Oxfam last year found that the UK is rapidly returning to Dickensian levels of inequality...
> 
> The tax system should be progressive and limit rather than exacerbate inequality. Warren Buffet underlined the unfairness of a tax system that allows him – on an income of $46m (£28m) – to pay only 17.7% in tax. His secretary, still on an above-average income of $60,000, is taxed at 30%.
> 
> ...


----------



## ddraig (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> Granted you lot are, once again, picking an extreme example to make your point here?
> 
> do I have a problem with a capitalistic system that, on occasion, lets grossly unfair greed occur? No problem at all, rather this than Socialism.


is your name Jack?


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

so this was all overseen by Labour government aswell? 
*"We (Labour) are intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich"*


i do agree with you, I have a book called Treasure Islands that just shows having offshore banking havens and ease of capital outside of countries just makes a messy horrible race to the bottom for all. gives a really interesting history of it all.
I would also say I do genuinely believe in Laffer curve style mechanics of a declining tax take, the higher the rate is. I believe the OBR have said the optimal tax rate to be 47%, anything less just painful.
The 45% rate WILL take in more tax than the 50% rate. the rich ARE paying more tax under the coalition. (though with that VAT rise it is not as pronounced.) They are doing the right thing to lower corporation tax, and the right thing lowering to 45% for the higher rate. Does anybody point out literally millions of people are now paying the higher rate cos they lowered the bands? They need to reverse that shit.

the reality of the situation is people blame the Tories, when Labour oversaw this financial clusterfuck we will experience for a generation at least.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Mar 29, 2013)

Brilliant, another one who thinks that anyone who doesn't like the Tories must be pro-Labour.

You should take your insights off to the Politics forums, I'm sure you could teach them a thing or two.


----------



## Libertad (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> Granted you lot are, once again, picking an extreme example to make your point here?
> 
> do I have a problem with a capitalistic system that, on occasion, lets grossly unfair greed occur? No problem at all, rather this than Socialism.


 
Get to fuck. Are you a standard bearer for Unum?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 29, 2013)

Libertad said:


> Get to fuck. Are you a standard bearer for Unum?


 
I'm wondering if he's paid enough into the system or whether he's got bundles of savings that will tide him over should he ever have a serious accident or illness or loses his job


----------



## Libertad (Mar 29, 2013)

I certainly wouldn't wish any such misfortune on him/her, I doubt very much whether they would be able to cope with the concomitant loss of "status".


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

I dont know what Unum is.

While I dont do a job that gives me moral superiority over everybody else like Minnie, I do my best.


----------



## Libertad (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> I dont know what Unum is.
> 
> While I dont do a job that gives me moral superiority over everybody else like Minnie, I do my best.


 
Your best isn't good enough sweetie.


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

dayum, concomitant...word of the day. I must use this asap.


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

Libertad said:


> Your best isn't good enough sweetie.


 
maybe not you, but I am happy with it. I think that is all that matters  Do you and your god given attributes justice.


----------



## Libertad (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> maybe not you, but I am happy with it. I think that is all that matters  Do you and your god given attributes justice.


 
Can anyone translate this incoherent drivel?


----------



## ddraig (Mar 29, 2013)

nah it's just Jack with its Jackanory


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

ddraig said:


> nah it's just Jack with its Jackanory


 
Jack Reacher?
Jack and the Beanstalk?
Jack Straw?
Jack Frost?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> I dont know what Unum is.
> 
> While I dont do a job that gives me moral superiority over everybody else like Minnie, I do my best.


 
I don't have moral superiority over everyone else.  I've worked, I've also been unemployed numerous times and had to put up with being treated like shit by people like you and Job Centre staff.


----------



## ddraig (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> Jack Reacher?
> Jack and the Beanstalk?
> Jack Straw?
> Jack Frost?


whichever one you want to be, as long as you're alright eh


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 29, 2013)

Libertad said:


> Can anyone translate this incoherent drivel?


 
No, despite being far superior to secateurz, it's just zooming right over my head


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

ddraig said:


> whichever one you want to be, as long as you're alright eh


 
Jack Wilshere then


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> Jack Wilshere then


Jack Shit


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

Do you find moderating this forum and lauding about in the manner above adds meaning to your life?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

Actually I think Pickman's is right...not long for this world. Apart from anything else I would imagine his grubby trolly little keyboard is seizing up with ejaculate as I type.


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

now now, just because somebody is not leaning the same way as you does not mean they are wrong, just different.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> Do you find moderating this forum and lauding about in the manner above adds meaning to your life?


I have a very full life....clearly yours is deeply lacking as your entertainment is somewhat shallow.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> Do you find moderating this forum and lauding about in the manner above adds meaning to your life?


...and it's lording, not lauding. To laud means to praise as in laudatory.


----------



## TonyH82 (Mar 29, 2013)

editor said:


> You're still entitled to it, just the same as you're entitled to NHS health care regardless of whether you're a millionaire or a pauper.


 
That's a disgusting attitude.

A sense of entitlement to state benefits is wrong. The welfare state was meant to be contributory. If everyone had that attitude, the welfare state would crumble.


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

unfortunately self entitlement is everywhere. a poison of the West.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

TonyH82 said:


> That's a disgusting attitude.
> 
> A sense of entitlement to state benefits is wrong. The welfare state was meant to be contributory. If everyone had that attitude, the welfare state would crumble.


So if someone is born with a severe disability they should be left to die? Hitler started his killing programme on disabled children in 1933. You're taking a very nasty stance there. I believe a society should be judged by how it treats its most vulnerable.


----------



## editor (Mar 29, 2013)

TonyH82 said:


> That's a disgusting attitude.
> 
> A sense of entitlement to state benefits is wrong. The welfare state was meant to be contributory. If everyone had that attitude, the welfare state would crumble.


So you don't believe in universal free healthcare? Go live in the US and see how you shape up when you get a serious illness.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> I love this use of bold


 
It's called "emphasis", you witling.



> if you are dependent on the state, like you clearly are, then what happened to being grateful for what you are given? when is it enough? if you have to be moved to a less expensive area wouldnt you be glad for the roof over your head?


 
Why should I be grateful for getting a return on what I've paid in over decades?



> Central bank intervention across the world has got the stock markets to these levels...


 
No, an upward trend *exacerbated* by central bank intervention has got them to those levels. Only an idiot could place the blame on central banks without blaming the structure and functions of the actual markets too.



> I dont care what you say.


 
You wouldn't. You're convinced you're right.



> You are not always right.


 
Neither have I claimed to be, although it appears that I'm right more often than you are.



> My leveller comment wasnt aimed at the super wealthy, it was aimed at everybody else. house prices will fall when it all pops. it is your belief that I am wrong...


 
It's my belief that housing prices won't be *allowed* (see? Emphasis!) to fall significantly, just as supply has been constrained for years in order to stop house prices doing a 1993.



> but that necessarily make it so.


 
One assumes that what you actually mean is "that doesn't necessarily make it so".
Ever heard of proofreading?



> and your use of bold just makes you like a try hard forum warrior...


 
Only in your opinion.
Which, lets face it, is worth slightly less than the smegma on a horse's cock.



> ...well versed with too much time on your hands. which is apt.


 
Nice little snide remarks about my being dependent on the state/having too much time on my hands. I shouldn't really be surpised, as I already know that you're moronic enough to think people should be grateful to the state, when all most of us are doing is getting a return on our National Insurance and Income Tax contributions, and sometimes on less visible contributions, like our health.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> Fair enough. What if you havent worked? Or what if you take out more than you put in?


 
I can't speak for those who've never worked, except to say that for more than 3/4 of the population, they will, during their working lives (i.e. 16-68) contribute enough to qualify for a state pension.

As for your "take out more than you put in", you appear to have missed the point of the basic premise behind National Insurance. It operates, and always has, on the principle of pooled risk. That's why National Insurance returns a surplus to the Treasury every year.
Don't take my word for it - do some research, if you prefer knowledge to wilful ignorance.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

I don't think history is their strong point.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> also fair enough. Is that right? sustainable? does it matter given the mahoosive miss allocation of spending across the gvmnt anyway ?


 
You ask if spending is sustainable. A better question would be "is it unsustainable given a system of taxation that doesn't allow the wealthy to avoid paying their due so easily".
The answer, as ever, is that it's entirely sustainable if those loopholes are closed, and no more new ones are opened _a la_ Dave Hartnett.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> I don't think history is their strong point.


 
I don't think THINKING is their strong point, frankly.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> in that very specific example they should get all the support they need from the government, that social safety net should never EVER go away


 
In that "very specific example" it's already gone. Mothers don't get the chance to be carers for their disabled child. They're forced to look for work once the child reaches school age.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> so this was all overseen by Labour government aswell?
> *"We (Labour) are intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich"*
> 
> 
> ...


 
I bet you believe that new Labour were "socialist" too.


----------



## TonyH82 (Mar 29, 2013)

editor said:


> So you don't believe in universal free healthcare? Go live in the US and see how you shape up when you get a serious illness.


 
I believe passionately in free healthcare.

I believe passionately in support for the disabled.

I think it is entirely correct that the state should pay unemployment benefit & housing benefit when people lose their employment.

But out welfare system is out of control. There are far too many universal benefits and people are addicted to them.

It is disgusting that there was such opposition when the government removed child benefit for the well off. Utter madness.

I consider it outrageous that the left-wing press put up such strong resistance to capping benefits at £500 per week for a family. To achieve that income, you would need a job paying >£30k, which is far more than most people make. Why should the state guarantee such a large income?

I think it is madness that my affluent grandparents get a free TV license and winter fuel payments which they end up funneling to their grandchildren.

Unfortunately, the sense of entitlement many people have in this country will make it difficult to reform this system.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> Do you find moderating this forum and lauding about in the manner above adds meaning to your life?


 
"Lording", not lauding. Lauding means (roughly) praising, you twat.

E2A: Damn, beaten to it by that Magpie woman!


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> "Lording", not lauding. Lauding means (roughly) praising, you twat.


I've already done that one VP


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

*Why should the state guarantee such a large income?*

I look forward to the Lefties on here justifying it.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> *Why should the state guarantee such a large income?*
> 
> I look forward to the Lefties on here justifying it.


Why do you think we're lefties? I don't vote labour or even to the left of labour. You have very simplistic views on politics.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

In fact I think there are many one-Nation tories spinning in their graves as I type. I know a lot of Tories who haven't dropped dead of shame yet and they have a lot of disquiet about the current tory party and it's got fuck all to do with gay marriage.


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

wasnt one nation a Labour thing?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2013)

TonyH82 said:


> That's a disgusting attitude.
> 
> A sense of entitlement to state benefits is wrong. The welfare state was meant to be contributory. If everyone had that attitude, the welfare state would crumble.


 
I'm not convinced. I've read enough research over the decades that I lean more toward accepting that *if* it hadn't been for the progressive stigmatisation of any sort of direct welfare (as opposed to universal health and education) over the past 30-35 years, that "sense of entitlement" could well have *strengthened* the welfare state. If people saw it as it was mostly seen between the mid-forties and mid-seventies, as something to invest in, as something to be proud of contributing to, then I'd say that outwith the neoliberal cock-socks that we have governing us (not forgetting those whose ideas they turn into legislation) that we'd see a different picture.
And sure there's a small fragment of the potential workforce that takes the piss - those who the DWP call "the hardcore unemployed", people who've been unemployed for 2 years or more and are labelled as "work avoiders", but they've never been quantified as more than a fragment. something on the order of 120,000 people out of 21 million members of the combined labour force and reserve labour pool. That's all they are though, a small fragment, not the Visigoths at the gate, here to wreck the system. We don't need Visigoths to do that - the neoliberals are doing it themselves.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> wasnt one nation a Labour thing?


 
Conservative. 1950s/60s/70s, washed away by Thatcherism.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> wasnt one nation a Labour thing?


 No. You really know nothing, do you?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> unfortunately self entitlement is everywhere. a poison of the West.


 
He's talking about a sense of entitlement, not about self-entitlement.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> self-entitlement.


That's the territory of tax evaders aka thieves


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> I love this use of bold!* if you are dependent on the state*, like you clearly are, then what happened to being grateful for what you are given? when is it enough? if you have to be moved to a less expensive area wouldnt you be glad for the roof over your head?
> 
> Central bank intervention across the world has got the stock markets to these levels, I dont care what you say. You are not always right.
> 
> My leveller comment wasnt aimed at the super wealthy, it was aimed at everybody else. house prices will fall when it all pops. it is your belief that I am wrong, but that necessarily make it so. and your use of bold just makes you like a try hard forum warrior, well versed with too much time on your hands. which is apt.


 

What a meaningless statement.  You're dependent on the state too, unless you've mastered the art of levitation or something.  Idiot.


----------



## MrSki (Mar 29, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Conservative. 1950s/60s/70s, washed away by Thatcherism.


Benjamin Disraeli 1850s


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> No. You really know nothing, do you?


----------



## ddraig (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> *Why should the state guarantee such a large income?*
> 
> I look forward to the Lefties on here justifying it.


if it is such a large income why don't you give up what you do and copy them


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

Blagsta said:


> What a meaningless statement. You're dependent on the state too, unless you've mastered the art of levitation or something. Idiot.


 
Aunt Sally


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

You clearly have a very short attention span, secateurtz...that's actually stolen from the likes of Supermac.


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

ddraig said:


> if it is such a large income why don't you give up what you do and copy them


 
Nope, you cant justify it.


----------



## ddraig (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> Nope, you cant justify it.


justify what?
can you back up anything you say?


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

the very post you quoted. are you a goldfish?


----------



## TonyH82 (Mar 29, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> I'm not convinced. I've read enough research over the decades that I lean more toward accepting that *if* it hadn't been for the progressive stigmatisation of any sort of direct welfare (as opposed to universal health and education) over the past 30-35 years, that "sense of entitlement" could well have *strengthened* the welfare state. If people saw it as it was mostly seen between the mid-forties and mid-seventies, as something to invest in, as something to be proud of contributing to, then I'd say that outwith the neoliberal cock-socks that we have governing us (not forgetting those whose ideas they turn into legislation) that we'd see a different picture.
> And sure there's a small fragment of the potential workforce that takes the piss - those who the DWP call "the hardcore unemployed", people who've been unemployed for 2 years or more and are labelled as "work avoiders", but they've never been quantified as more than a fragment. something on the order of 120,000 people out of 21 million members of the combined labour force and reserve labour pool. That's all they are though, a small fragment, not the Visigoths at the gate, here to wreck the system. We don't need Visigoths to do that - the neoliberals are doing it themselves.


 
The long-term unemployed aren't a massive issue.

But given the finite resources that the state has, the welfare state is now too big. Universal benefits were a mistake and it is good they are being gradually rolled back.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

...and I know all this despite having left school and gone straight into work at 16...to think I paid towards secateurz education


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> unfortunately self entitlement is everywhere. a poison of the West.


 
Yeah, the self entitlement of politicians, bankers, bosses.


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 29, 2013)

TonyH82 said:


> I believe passionately in free healthcare.
> 
> I believe passionately in support for the disabled.
> 
> ...



Evidence?


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> Aunt Sally


 
Your mum.


----------



## editor (Mar 29, 2013)

TonyH82 said:


> The long-term unemployed aren't a massive issue.


They're a fucking massive issue if you're one of them, living in a shit town on shit benefits and watching all life's opportunities pass by you by through no fault of your own.


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 29, 2013)

TonyH82 said:


> The long-term unemployed aren't a massive issue.
> 
> But given the finite resources that the state has, *the welfare state is now too big. Universal benefits were a mistake* and it is good they are being gradually rolled back.


 
Evidence?


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> ...and I know all this despite having left school and gone straight into work at 16...to think I paid towards secateurz education


 
and look what I have done with it! well you wont ever know, but its not half bad.


----------



## MrSki (Mar 29, 2013)

TonyH82 said:


> The long-term unemployed aren't a massive issue.
> 
> But given the finite resources that the state has, the welfare state is now too big. Universal benefits were a mistake and it is good they are being gradually rolled back.


Good for whom?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2013)

TonyH82 said:


> I believe passionately in free healthcare.
> 
> I believe passionately in support for the disabled.
> 
> ...


 
Tony, there are hardly any universal benefits. There's Child Benefit and the State Pension, Winter Fuel Allowance for the over 65s/68s, and a couple more. That's it



> It is disgusting that there was such opposition when the government removed child benefit for the well off. Utter madness.


 
Did you ever bother to differentiate between opposition to removal of Child Benefit _per se_ and the deliberate erosion of the principle of universality? People don't appear to realise that the next step may well be to (purely because it's the greatest cost to the Treasury) progressively limit the State Pension until it's only available to a residual number of claimants.



> I consider it outrageous that the left-wing press put up such strong resistance to capping benefits at £500 per week for a family. To achieve that income, you would need a job paying >£30k, which is far more than most people make. Why should the state guarantee such a large income?


 
That £500 per week includes any Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit, if claimable. If that family of, lets say 2 adults and 2 kids, is in a 3-bedroom Housing Association dwelling in the south-east, that's 50-60% of their total figure gone in rent. Council tax for a 3-bed (so band C or above) in the southeast is going to run to £1000-1200 a years, so that's another £20-25 a week gone, and what you're left with is just enough to keep the wolf from the door *if* you don't have any emergencies. If any of your white goods break down, you're donalded.



> I think it is madness that my affluent grandparents get a free TV license and winter fuel payments which they end up funneling to their grandchildren.
> 
> Unfortunately, the sense of entitlement many people have in this country will make it difficult to reform this system.


 
Many of us paid in on the premise that NI was, you know, *insurance*! That if the worst happened, we had something to fall back on. I have a sense of entitlement purely because the state, well into the '90s, took my money and told me I was entitled to certain things *because* they were taking my money.


----------



## TonyH82 (Mar 29, 2013)

Blagsta said:


> Evidence?


 
The mainstream press.

The left resist the benefit cap.

Whilst the right resit the removal of child benefit for high earners.


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 29, 2013)

TonyH82 said:


> The mainstream press.
> 
> The left resist the benefit cap.
> 
> Whilst the right resit the removal of child benefit for high earners.


 
I asked for evidence.  Put up or shut up, that's how it works round here.


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

editor said:


> They're a fucking massive issue if you're one of them, living in a shit town on shit benefits and watching all life's opportunities pass by you by through no fault of your own.


 
bring back more grammar schools. another Labour failure.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> I've already done that one VP


 
Hence my edit.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> *Why should the state guarantee such a large income?*
> 
> I look forward to the Lefties on here justifying it.


 
You might have a point if many of us were "lefties". Sadly for you, most of us aren't.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> bring back more grammar schools. another Labour failure.


I worked in a comprehensive that got more kids into university (Russell Group) than my Grammar school ever did.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

In fact my Grammar school failed a lot of bright children, me included.


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> You might have a point if many of us were "lefties". Sadly for you, most of us aren't.


 
but some of you are..so your post is redundant. sadly.


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> In fact my Grammar school failed a lot of bright children, me included.


 
yes its their fault. never yours.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2013)

MrSki said:


> Benjamin Disraeli 1850s


 
Apologies. I was thinking more of MacMillan and the rest of the last majority-Etonian Tory upper heirarchy.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

They just coasted along knowing they had the cleverest 10% and the teaching was shit. I didn't realise how shit until I worked in a comprehensive.


----------



## secateurz (Mar 29, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Apologies. I was thinking more of MacMillan and the rest of the last majority-Etonian Tory upper heirarchy.


 
Etonian nonsense like we have now...or nuLabour Bliarite hierachy?

like picking between two turds.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> yes its their fault. never yours.


I don't think sitting in silence copying a textbook was good teaching. 6 kids in my year went to university. That's appallingly low. Out of 90 children who were the brightest 10%


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

...and they were, apart from one, the kids whose parents paid for private tuition.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

Thankfully my old school no longer exists.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 29, 2013)

secateurz said:


> come to West Norwood


 
you really are an unpleasant poster


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 29, 2013)

TonyH82 said:


> I'm moving into Brixton Square soon with my girlfriend (who is black). She wants to know if she will be the only black person in the village?


 
My Black British friend who grew up in Brixton would reckon she will be in the minority in the Village.


----------



## TonyH82 (Mar 29, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Tony, there are hardly any universal benefits. There's Child Benefit and the State Pension, Winter Fuel Allowance for the over 65s/68s, and a couple more. That's it
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Your detailed and reasoned responses are refreshing compared to some people on this board!

Agreed re: your last point. I'm 30 and I've worked without a break since finishing uni. If I lost my job I'd claim every benefit possible, without shame as I've earned it. But I do not expect to receive thing such as child benefit / winter fuel payments whilst I have a decent income.

I've heard those numbers re: the benefits cap before. It all comes down to housing costs in my mind. In the South, housing is too expensive. It is a pity the government isn't attempting to increase the supply of housing.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2013)

TonyH82 said:


> The long-term unemployed aren't a massive issue.
> 
> But given the finite resources that the state has, the welfare state is now too big. Universal benefits were a mistake and it is good they are being gradually rolled back.


 
What does "too big" mean, though?
Too big to be affordable?
Too big for your liking?
Too big to be able to operate efficiently?
What?

As for "finite resources", that's not exactly a new problem, and yet, for example, there was no wish or requirement to demolish the principle of universality for around 50 years post-Beveridge. "Finite resources" are an excuse to shift welfare out of public hands into private, thereby minimising expenditure "at the faucet" of public need, and maximising it as private profit.

You're great at trotting out the soft-right tropes about the welfare state. The problem is that few of them play beyond the circle of believers they're written for. They don't stand up to serious analysis.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> My Black British friend who grew up in Brixton would reckon she will be in the minority in the Village.


 
Shades of David Cameron!


----------



## AprilNatalie (Mar 29, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> I have lived in Brixton for years. I always thought it was a desirable place to live. I do not need/ never have needed Brixton to be validated by anyone else.


 
Your opinion on if Brixton is desirable or not is obviously biased because you live here for so long, and know it well. The unknown is always scary, and to a lot of people (especially following the riots), Brixton, Peckham and other areas of south london have a reputation as being unsafe and undesirable. Maybe I can see that more clearly than you considering that I only moved here last year, and I will admit that this was my attitude towards the area before, and now I love it. 



Gramsci said:


> You mention East End. Like Brixton the issue is not change but the fact that in near future it will be simply unaffordable for new people to come to parts of London unless they are well off.
> 
> So my criticism of what is happening to London is that its gradually becoming a playground for the well off.


 
We live in the capital city, it's obviously going to be expensive. Like with every issue, instead of looking at the governments and the way they choose to run the country, we blame other people be it based on race, wealth or social background. The point I was originally making is that who are you or anyone else to decide who can move into a certain area or not, just because you've lived there for a certain period of time. 

If someone turned around and said that their criticism of London is that its gradually becoming a playground for the poor, would it be regarded as an appropriate or reasonable comment to make? No probably not. It seems like a slightly skewed attitude to blame the well off for wanting to live in a desirable place and having the money to do so. In an ideal world it wouldn't be like that, but that's how our economy works and that isn't the fault of any group of people - hipsters/yuppies/the wealthy/the poor/blacks/whites/asians/dogs/cats/flamingos. Seems like everyone just wants someone to blame.




Gramsci said:


> The blame is being put solely on hipsters?
> 
> I think you need to look up my posts. I post up here about housing/ "regeneration" etc. Among other topics.
> 
> ...


 
I think your misreading what I was trying to say - I was using hipsters as an example. People choose their religion but can still be discriminated against because of it. I don't think any form of prejudice or discrimination is justified, its just a gateway to bigger and worse things.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2013)

TonyH82 said:


> Your detailed and reasoned responses are refreshing compared to some people on this board!
> 
> Agreed re: your last point. I'm 30 and I've worked without a break since finishing uni. If I lost my job I'd claim every benefit possible, without shame as I've earned it. But I do not expect to receive thing such as child benefit / winter fuel payments whilst I have a decent income.
> 
> I've heard those numbers re: the benefits cap before. It all comes down to housing costs in my mind. In the South, housing is too expensive. It is a pity the government isn't attempting to increase the supply of housing.


 
I've said it before, and I'll doubtless say it again until people are heartily sick of hearing it, but neither this government nor a Labour government or any form of coalition government can or will increase the housing supply by a volume significant enough to lower rental and purchase prices. To do so would undermine one of the crutches our limping economy is relying on to keep our recession moving on a plateau rather than downhill.


----------



## TonyH82 (Mar 29, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> What does "too big" mean, though?
> Too big to be affordable?
> Too big for your liking?
> Too big to be able to operate efficiently?
> ...


 
Too big to be affordable.

Gordon Brown was running large deficits during a time of good economic growth and strong tax receipts. Much of this was due to massive expansion of the state (including the welfare state).

State support should always be there. But there isn't an endless pot of money to fund everything that people want. Focusing on the essentials is key.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2013)

Blagsta said:


> Your mum.


 
His mum is Una Stubbs?


----------



## el-ahrairah (Mar 29, 2013)

AprilNatalie said:


> If someone turned around and said that their criticism of London is that its gradually becoming a playground for the poor, would it be regarded as an appropriate or reasonable comment to make?


 
because it would have very different connotations to saying an area is a playground for the rich.  london IS a playground for the rich, and the poor suffer.  if you think that's prejudiced then you need to have a work with yourself.

i do agree that blaming the hipsters and yuppies is blaming a symptom, not a cause.  it might seem odd to hear me say that, seeing as i'm quite unreasonably rude about those elements of my fellow man.  However, racists and muggers are symptoms of capitalism as well and i'm pretty disdainful about them too.


----------



## TonyH82 (Mar 29, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> I've said it beofre, and I'll doubtless say it again until people are heartily sick of hearing it, but neither this government nor a Labour government or any form of coalition government can or will increase the housing supply by a volume significant enough to lower rental and purchase prices. To do so would undermine one of the crutches our limping economy is relying on to keep our recession moving on a plateau rather than downhill.


 
agreed. a rapid 30% fall in residential property values would crush our banks.

but people need to realise that a house is a place to live. not an investment.

a gradual decline or long term stagnation in house prices would be fantastic news.

it will be interesting to see what the reductions in housing benefit does to rents / house prices. removing a floor to the market should force prices down.


----------



## RaverDrew (Mar 29, 2013)




----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

TonyH82 said:


> I'm 30


Mere stripling! My eldest is 39 this year!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2013)

TonyH82 said:


> Too big to be affordable.


 
It isn't, though. It only *appears* unaffordable because costs are measured against receipts accepted. Police receipts better (i.e. harden the dividing line between tax avoidance and tax evasion, and then act ruthlessly with those who cross the line) and things are no longer unaffordable. Hartnett alone knocked the Exchequer for about £4 billion (split it over the decade the screw was running and you've got £400 million a year) from a single corporate taxpayer. Even if we use the Treasury's own £45 billion a year figure of 2011, that's a fair degree of "affordability" escaping for ideological reasons (one of which is, of course, the residualisation of the "welfare state").



> Gordon Brown was running large deficits during a time of good economic growth and strong tax receipts. Much of this was due to massive expansion of the state (including the welfare state).


 
As I've mentioned elsewhere, Brown was running up those deficits on sound independent advice. "It's fine to go into the red at this stage of the economic cycle, Chancellor!". Neither Brown nor those consultants and economists who gave him such advice saw "the credit crunch" coming.
As for "expansion of the welfare state", the only expansion was a tax credit system that replaced other methods of redistribution and enhanced uptake, all budgeted for anyway. Cost expansion mainly resided in the infrastructure programmes for the NHS and DfE, much of which was undertaken through the ridiculously cost-ineffective PFI and PPP programmes.



> State support should always be there. But there isn't an endless pot of money to fund everything that people want. Focusing on the essentials is key.


 
Oh my, my favourite cliché, the one about the "endless pot of money"! 
We're all well aware that funding is limited. It's writ large on our lives. We also know that funding is being progressively limited at source for ideological reasons, not because the limited resources of the Treasury are anywhere near exhaustion!


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

These boards really make me feel old sometimes.


----------



## Libertad (Mar 29, 2013)

TonyH82 said:


> it will be interesting to see what the reductions in housing benefit does to rents / house prices. removing a floor to the market should force prices down.


 
It would be interesting to see mass evictions and homelessness would it not?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

Libertad said:


> It would be interesting to see mass evictions and homelessness would it not?


I've already taken in people who can't afford to live in rented places in London any more....and I've had a phone call tonight already asking for a bed for the night on my sofa. I'm already living in interesting times.


----------



## Libertad (Mar 29, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> I've already taken in people who can't afford to live in rented places in London any more....and I've had a phone call tonight already asking for a bed for the night on my sofa. I'm already living in interesting times.


 
Not liking.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

Apart from the latter who is disabled and homeless, they're working.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

....and the latter had a job until recently.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Thankfully my old school no longer exists.


 
Neither does mine. Died a few years short of it's 300th birthday, and the building is used as a bloody prep school by South Chelsea-ites.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

Mine is luxury flats.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 29, 2013)

It was a private nursing home for a while, from the late seventies iirc, but it was empty for a while.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2013)

TonyH82 said:


> agreed. a rapid 30% fall in residential property values would crush our banks.
> 
> but people need to realise that a house is a place to live. not an investment.
> 
> ...


 
It should force prices down, all things being equal, but the problem is that all things aren't equal. For example, the MASSIVE excess of demand over housing supply in Greater London alone exerts enough of an upward pressure on prices that the removal of your floor is unlikely to work to do more than put prices on hold for a small amount of time, and as we're moving into "buying season" in a couple of months, it may not even do that.


----------



## TonyH82 (Mar 29, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> It isn't, though. It only *appears* unaffordable because costs are measured against receipts accepted. Police receipts better (i.e. harden the dividing line between tax avoidance and tax evasion, and then act ruthlessly with those who cross the line) and things are no longer unaffordable. Hartnett alone knocked the Exchequer for about £4 billion (split it over the decade the screw was running and you've got £400 million a year) from a single corporate taxpayer. Even if we use the Treasury's own £45 billion a year figure of 2011, that's a fair degree of "affordability" escaping for ideological reasons (one of which is, of course, the residualisation of the "welfare state").
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
1) In this age of globalisation a competitive tax system is key. We need to attract business to the UK. Lower corporate taxes would be a good thing as it would create jobs.

2) Agreed. Brown made bad decisions and much of the western world got hooked to a massive debt binge.

3) Listen to the budget. The deficit is huge. Public debt is approaching 100% of GDP. You cannot tax your way out of this kind of hole. The treasury is broke!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2013)

Libertad said:


> It would be interesting to see mass evictions and homelessness would it not?


 
It'd be interesting to see the political effect(s), but hardly interesting to see the social and personal damage to individuals and communities.


----------



## Libertad (Mar 29, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> It'd be interesting to see the political effect(s), but hardly interesting to see the social and personal damage to individuals and communities.


 
My implied point VP.


----------



## gaijingirl (Mar 29, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Mine is luxury flats.


 
mine too...


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 29, 2013)

AprilNatalie said:


> Your opinion on if Brixton is desirable or not is obviously biased because you live here for so long, and know it well. The unknown is always scary, and to a lot of people (especially following the riots), Brixton, Peckham and other areas of south london have a reputation as being unsafe and undesirable. Maybe I can see that more clearly than you considering that I only moved here last year, and I will admit that this was my attitude towards the area before, and now I love it.
> 
> We live in the capital city, it's obviously going to be expensive. Like with every issue, instead of looking at the governments and the way they choose to run the country, we blame other people be it based on race, wealth or social background. The point I was originally making is that who are you or anyone else to decide who can move into a certain area or not, just because you've lived there for a certain period of time.
> 
> ...


 
Governments have a role but in a globalised neo liberal world a limited one. So I think its perfectly acceptable to regard certain groups/ classes of people as my adversaries. After all this is how politics in a democratic society is supposed to work. Different classes and social groups are in conflict with each other. We are not all in it together. Democracy is supposed to be a peaceful way to manage conflict. It however has turned into centre ground management. Which is ideological whilst seeming not to be. Democracy can be seen in different ways. A liberal one of different interest groups electing representatives to oversee society. This leaves out the fact that some social groups have more social power than others. Or seeing a democratic society as an arena of potential conflict and antagonistic relations between different groups.

The present economic crisis is going to exacerbate tensions. Not sure about your age. But when I saw the recent riots in London I was not shocked. Seen it all before in the 80s. I think for some people growing up under last government its not normal. To me it is. Thatcher restructured this society radically. She was not averse to conflict or using the police when necessary. This is what I grew up with. 

You are missing the class dimension. I might get on in a perfectly reasonable fashion with some of the well off people I meet on a day to day basis in Belgravia for example ( I get around a bit) . However that does not mean in the end I regard there interests as the same as mine. There is a difference between dealing with people individually and looking at society structurally - a class based society like this one. 

Its wrong to say that because we live in London its "obviously going to be expensive". You are falling into the trap of thinking that the way things are is just the natural course of events. Its not. Its a product of history and politics. When I first came to London in 79 central London was not "obviously" expensive. 

The same goes for the way "our economy works". Not my economy. I don't get asked about it. The recent economic crisis makes it clear how "our economy works". The City and bankers have made sure there interests are looked after at the expense of the lives of the less well off. And there is now evidence that the biggest hits are being taken by the poorest 10%. As far as I am concerned this is class issue. 

The well off have always lived around Brixton area. That is my point about what is happening to London. Unlike other cities classes lived near each other. This is what is going. 

I also have issues with the recent extension of discrimination to religion. Racism is different from criticising religion. And I think it should be clearly kept that way.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 29, 2013)

TonyH82 said:


> it will be interesting to see what the reductions in housing benefit does to rents / house prices. removing a floor to the market should force prices down.


 
In London it will not force prices down. The landlords can get tenants anyway. My friend in north London has not trouble getting tenants for the flat she rents. She will not take people on benefits.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2013)

TonyH82 said:


> 1) In this age of globalisation a competitive tax system is key. We need to attract business to the UK. Lower corporate taxes would be a good thing as it would create jobs.


 
That tune has been trumpeted for 30 years now, and it's no more tuneful now than it was then. Lower corporate taxes invariably *don't* create new jobs in the UK because we don't actually attract the sort of corporates who manufacture goods, which minimises possible job creation to the service or banking sectors, neither of which have provided much more than enough jobs to offset the slow death of the manufacturing sector - a sector that is dying not because it's time is past, but because an ideological choice was made in the late 1970s to assist the decline of manufacturing in order to destroy trades unionism.



> 2) Agreed. Brown made bad decisions and much of the western world got hooked to a massive debt binge.
> 
> 3) Listen to the budget. The deficit is huge. Public debt is approaching 100% of GDP. You cannot tax your way out of this kind of hole. The treasury is broke!


 
Public debt has approached much worse than that and survived. The deficit is eminently survivable given basic neo-Keynesian economics (and lets not get into the whole "austerity=untested and destructive vs. Keynesianism=tested and efficacious" debate!). Panicking because of the *perception* that there's a crisis is balm to george Osborne's soul. It puts lead in his pencil because people don't explore beyond the headlines to the fundamentals. Remember when Gideon was selling his "we'll lose our credit rating" _schtick_ a few years ago? Anyone who looked at the fundamentals knew he was talking shit, that we'd not go Greece, Ireland or Spain's way because the fundamentals of the economy were sound. They've only *started* to become unsound, to give rise to a modicum of concern, in the last 3-4 quarters, and only because Osborne's economic policy has actively underminded any potential for growth.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2013)

Libertad said:


> My implied point VP.


 
I know. I said it so you didn't have to reiterate yourself for any thickies.


----------



## Libertad (Mar 29, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> I know. I said it so you didn't have to reiterate yourself for any thickies.


 
Thank you kindly.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 29, 2013)

TonyH82 said:


> 3) Listen to the budget. The deficit is huge. Public debt is approaching 100% of GDP. You cannot tax your way out of this kind of hole. The treasury is broke!


 
It needs to be remembered the Treasury is broke because it saved the Banks. Its not down to the fiction put out by Osbourne that there is a "structural deficit" of "overspending" by Gordon Brown.

Osbourne policy is that it "overspending" on welfare that is the problem. So the state need to be shrunken further. Not exactly been a great success so far.


----------



## TonyH82 (Mar 29, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> That tune has been trumpeted for 30 years now, and it's no more tuneful now than it was then. Lower corporate taxes invariably *don't* create new jobs in the UK because we don't actually attract the sort of corporates who manufacture goods, which minimises possible job creation to the service or banking sectors, neither of which have provided much more than enough jobs to offset the slow death of the manufacturing sector - a sector that is dying not because it's time is past, but because an ideological choice was made in the late 1970s to assist the decline of manufacturing in order to destroy trades unionism.
> 
> 
> 
> Public debt has approached much worse than that and survived. The deficit is eminently survivable given basic neo-Keynesian economics (and lets not get into the whole "austerity=untested and destructive vs. Keynesianism=tested and efficacious" debate!). Panicking because of the *perception* that there's a crisis is balm to george Osborne's soul. It puts lead in his pencil because people don't explore beyond the headlines to the fundamentals. Remember when Gideon was selling his "we'll lose our credit rating" _schtick_ a few years ago? Anyone who looked at the fundamentals knew he was talking shit, that we'd not go Greece, Ireland or Spain's way because the fundamentals of the economy were sound. They've only *started* to become unsound, to give rise to a modicum of concern, in the last 3-4 quarters, and only because Osborne's economic policy has actively underminded any potential for growth.


 
You've outlasted me! I give up on this debate about the size of the state / economic policy.

It is a shame that areas of London are getting so expensive that people are being forced to move.

It is happening to pretty much everyone in one way or another. Many of people moving to Brixton would probably have preferred to live in other locations - but due to increased prices they are having to look elsewhere.

Sadly, I don't think anyone in the coalition / the opposition have the will to make a meaningful difference. This branch of Foxtons will not be the last change to Brixton that the members of this board object to.


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 29, 2013)

TonyH82 said:


> Too big to be affordable.
> 
> Gordon Brown was running large deficits during a time of good economic growth and strong tax receipts. Much of this was due to massive expansion of the state (including the welfare state).
> 
> State support should always be there. But there isn't an endless pot of money to fund everything that people want. Focusing on the essentials is key.


 
Affordable to who?  This idea the country is skint is a lie.  Check the Sunday Times Rich List.  The deficit does not exist due to the welfare state.  That's another lie.


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 29, 2013)

TonyH82 said:


> agreed. a rapid 30% fall in residential property values would crush our banks.
> 
> but people need to realise that a house is a place to live. not an investment.
> 
> ...


 

will it bollocks, all it will do is mean that people move out of London, I've already had to


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 29, 2013)

TonyH82 said:


> The long-term unemployed aren't a massive issue.
> 
> But given the finite resources that the state has, the welfare state is now too big. Universal benefits were a mistake and it is good they are being gradually rolled back.


 
What about "quantitative easing"? Seems to me the state has a lot of resources when needed. It was states that went to save the banking system when the "Master of the Universe" fucked up.

Quantitative easing did not help the economy it went to save the banks. The banks/ City are welfare dependent.

Several banks were effectively (and still are) nationalised.

There is also argument put forward by economists like Stiglitz that benefits should not be cut in a recession but increased. The money from benefits goes directly back into the economy. Unlike Quantitative Easing which has been hoarded by Banks.

Universal benefits are (or were) central to Beveridge ( a Liberal not a socialist) ideas:



> Together with a national health service and maintenance of employment, a universal children's allowance was one of the three pillars of the welfare state set out by William Beveridge (below) in his seminal 1942 report.


 
The Welfare State was not set up purely as a safety net for those who fall on hard times.


----------



## leanderman (Mar 30, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> It needs to be remembered the Treasury is broke because it saved the Banks. Its not down to the fiction put out by Osbourne that there is a "structural deficit" of "overspending" by Gordon Brown.
> 
> .




I am surprised by this contention. 

Quite aside from the bank bail-out, I understand that we have been overspending and have run up a major debt.

I think the bank bail-out is a cash for shares deal that may or not cost us, depending on the stock price of RBS and Lloyds at the point we sell out.


----------



## Winot (Mar 30, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Actually I think Pickman's is right...not long for this world. Apart from anything else I would imagine his grubby trolly little keyboard is seizing up with ejaculate as I type.



When I saw his username I had a feeling he was for the chop.


----------



## mxh (Mar 30, 2013)

leanderman said:


> I think the bank bail-out is a cash for shares deal that may or not cost us, depending on the stock price of RBS and Lloyds at the point we sell out.


 
I think the real plan is to inflate our way out of the debt, that is the only way we will technically not lose from the shambles of RBS.


----------



## secateurz (Mar 30, 2013)

mxh said:


> I think the real plan is to inflate our way out of the debt, that is the only way we will technically not lose from the shambles of RBS.


I agree...but I do believe this will take >10 years


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 30, 2013)

leanderman said:


> I am surprised by this contention.
> 
> Quite aside from the bank bail-out, I understand that we have been overspending and have run up a major debt.
> 
> I think the bank bail-out is a cash for shares deal that may or not cost us, depending on the stock price of RBS and Lloyds at the point we sell out.


 
Understand from where?

And who is "we"?

The saving of RBS was only one part of the saving of the Banking system. Both here and in USA government action like Quantitative Easing, underwriting of banking with long and short term loans has been done. A raft of measures to stop the banking system seizing up completely.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 30, 2013)

TonyH82 said:


> You've outlasted me! I give up on this debate about the size of the state / economic policy.


 
I outlasted you because I have right on my side.   



> It is a shame that areas of London are getting so expensive that people are being forced to move.
> 
> It is happening to pretty much everyone in one way or another. Many of people moving to Brixton would probably have preferred to live in other locations - but due to increased prices they are having to look elsewhere.


 
It's a function of "gentrification", which itself is merely a colonisation of "working class" parts of London by the ever-expanding "middle classes". As ever, money talks loudest and common-sense comes a distant second. Even the Victorians knew better than this, which is why they developed housing for "the lower orders" at the same time as developing housing for the servant-hiring classes.



> Sadly, I don't think anyone in the coalition / the opposition have the will to make a meaningful difference. This branch of Foxtons will not be the last change to Brixton that the members of this board object to.


 
No-one is saying it will be, just that it's a "marker" for a particular perceptual shift in how the wider public have come to see Brixton.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 30, 2013)

leanderman said:


> I am surprised by this contention.
> 
> Quite aside from the bank bail-out, I understand that we have been overspending and have run up a major debt.


 
As I said above, what's blamed on Brown wouldn't have become debt but for the credit crucnch, which was an externally-produced and unanticipateable event.



> I think the bank bail-out is a cash for shares deal that may or not cost us, depending on the stock price of RBS and Lloyds at the point we sell out.


 
Thing is, the "bailout" is deeper than simply the buying of an interest in a couple of banks - it's also about QE, about easy money floated to other, less car-crash, financial institutions and other "corporate welfare" packages offered to The City and big business post-crunch.


----------



## leanderman (Mar 30, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> As I said above, what's blamed on Brown wouldn't have become debt but for the credit crucnch, which was an externally-produced and unanticipateable event.
> 
> 
> 
> Thing is, the "bailout" is deeper than simply the buying of an interest in a couple of banks - it's also about QE, about easy money floated to other, less car-crash, financial institutions and other "corporate welfare" packages offered to The City and big business post-crunch.



Certainly it has punished savers and pensioners and filled the pockets of borrowers, such as those with mortgages.


----------



## B-Town (Mar 30, 2013)

Changing the subject slightly, I have recently been looking at the prices in Brixton and how much they have shot up over the last couple of years... A two bed flat on Joshephine Ave has just sold for £410K with Foxtons, it doesnt even have a garden. Whilst I find these prices incredible, how long do you think they can continue to rise for - surely Brixton is close to its ceiling now?


----------



## Kanda (Mar 30, 2013)

B-Town said:


> Changing the subject slightly, I have recently been looking at the prices in Brixton and how much they have shot up over the last couple of years... A two bed flat on Joshephine Ave has just sold for £410K with Foxtons, it doesnt even have a garden. Whilst I find these prices incredible, how long do you think they can continue to rise for - surely Brixton is close to its ceiling now?


 
Nope. It will reach Clapham sized amounts soon.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 30, 2013)

B-Town said:


> Changing the subject slightly, I have recently been looking at the prices in Brixton and how much they have shot up over the last couple of years... A two bed flat on Joshephine Ave has just sold for £410K with Foxtons, it doesnt even have a garden. Whilst I find these prices incredible, how long do you think they can continue to rise for - surely Brixton is close to its ceiling now?


 
I can't find my post (sure it's in this thread somewhere) of house prices in Elms Road in Clapham where I used to live. There were half a dozen properties that were over £2 million there.

Obviously they're not 2 bedrooms though


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 30, 2013)

Ah, here you go

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/house-pr...7&referrer=detailPage&columnToSort=PRICE_DESC


----------



## MillwallShoes (Mar 30, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Ah, here you go
> 
> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/house-pr...7&referrer=detailPage&columnToSort=PRICE_DESC


 
how rich must you be to be able to afford places like that? really. rough guess at the net worth and salary of people who can afford them sort of houses? i just don't get it. london is getting so exclusive.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 30, 2013)

MillwallShoes said:


> how rich must you be to be able to afford places like that? really. rough guess at the net worth and salary of people who can afford them sort of houses? i just don't get it. london is getting so exclusive.


 
I used to live in one of them that is now just short of £1m.  I think when my friends bought it, it was maybe around £300,000, but they spent a nearly a year camped in the garden whilst they refurbished it.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 30, 2013)

2 bedroom off Clapham Common, over £600k

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-40527197.html


----------



## leanderman (Mar 31, 2013)

As I noted here earlier this week, a two-bed garden flat in Leander Rd has just sold at £465,000, against an asking price of £445,000.

Last summer, two 4-bed houses, both very rundown, sold for 'only' £500,000 and £545,000. 

Bonkers, but the mistake is to think it's only happening here. 

In neighbouring districts the rises are possibly even more extreme.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 31, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Thing is, the "bailout" is deeper than simply the buying of an interest in a couple of banks - it's also about QE, about easy money floated to other, less car-crash, financial institutions and other "corporate welfare" packages offered to The City and big business post-crunch.


 
Exactly. Private Eye "In the city" Slicker did a good piece on it a while back. The corporate welfare (By US and UK) also extended to banks like Barclays.

Brown/ Darling never got any thanks for this from the City.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 31, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> It's a function of "gentrification", which itself is merely a colonisation of "working class" parts of London by the ever-expanding "middle classes". As ever, money talks loudest and common-sense comes a distant second. Even the Victorians knew better than this, which is why they developed housing for "the lower orders" at the same time as developing housing for the servant-hiring classes.


 
Middle Class are made up of different elements. Brixton always had middle class in it as well. Remember seeing exhibition about 81 riots. One piece on display was about composition of Brixton at that time. It also had middle class public sector professionals - social workers etc in it. Who tended to be on the left.

Its also potentially middle class professionals like teachers who are also going to be priced out of Brixton.

Any opposition to the present Tory "reforms" of housing and the welfare state needs alliance of sections of the middle class as well as working class.

After all as Ed posted up here (on this thread I think) early post war public housing was not only meant for the poorest.

I agree about the Victorians. The present Tories think that the less well off should not be entitled to live in central London. As I go around Chelsea , for example, I see old Victorian housing built for the working classes.


----------



## leanderman (Mar 31, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> Exactly. Private Eye "In the city" Slicker did a good piece on it a while back. The corporate welfare (By US and UK) also extended to banks like Barclays.
> 
> Brown/ Darling never got any thanks for this from the City.



Barclays drew on the easy money from the Fed and BoE but was just as reliant on a huge investment from the Gulf. 

The measures deemed necessary to save all of us - such as QE  - are making the rich richer by inflating their assets and making those assets cheaper to fund. 

I think this is a consequence of the policy rather than its main aim.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 31, 2013)

B-Town said:


> Changing the subject slightly, I have recently been looking at the prices in Brixton and how much they have shot up over the last couple of years... A two bed flat on Joshephine Ave has just sold for £410K with Foxtons, it doesnt even have a garden. Whilst I find these prices incredible, how long do you think they can continue to rise for - surely Brixton is close to its ceiling now?


What people often ignore is that prices in places like Brixton tend not to rise merely as a result of popularity, but because prices in surrounding areas have risen too. They rise because of an excess of demand over supply.
Calculate the number of households in, say, Greater London, and the number of available dwellings. Now look at the disparity between households and available dwellings. With that kind of pressure on supply (estimates of excess of households over dwellings vary from as few as 50,000 to as many as 250,000, so even if we split the difference, that's 150,000 dwellings too few), little short of a major economic meltdown is going to exert downward pressure on prices. We can look forward to seeing those prices continue to edge up.


----------



## leanderman (Mar 31, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> What people often ignore is that prices in places like Brixton tend not to rise merely as a result of popularity, but because prices in surrounding areas have risen too. They rise because of an excess of demand over supply.
> Calculate the number of households in, say, Greater London, and the number of available dwellings. Now look at the disparity between households and available dwellings. With that kind of pressure on supply (estimates of excess of households over dwellings vary from as few as 50,000 to as many as 250,000, so even if we split the difference, that's 150,000 dwellings too few), little short of a major economic meltdown is going to exert downward pressure on prices. We can look forward to seeing those prices continue to edge up.


 
London's population figures make the same point:

2001: 7.2million
2011: 8.2million
2018: 9million (ONS forecast)


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 31, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Barclays drew on the easy money from the Fed and BoE but was just as reliant on a huge investment from the Gulf.
> 
> The measures deemed necessary to save all of us - such as QE - are making the rich richer by inflating their assets and making those assets cheaper to fund.
> 
> I think this is a consequence of the policy rather than its main aim.


 
At the start of the crisis the Governor of the Bank of England was talking about "moral hazard" in relation to saving the banking system.

I notice this language has gone. It was thrown out in the panic when governments realised the muppets in banking had potentially brought capitalism to a crisis that it could not get out of.

There were no "policies" as such initially. The aim was to save the banking system and bankers. ( Fred Goodwin for example went to see Darling to complain that the Governor of the Bank of England was being "difficult") The raft of measures brought in meant "moral hazard" had to be ditched. "Policy" was made ad hoc.

In the long term is has "not saved us all". There is a whole lot of people suffering out there (not bankers).

A total collapse of the economy might have been better than what is happening now. Which is that the poorest 30% are getting hammered.

The calculation is that whilst the middle classed might have to tighten there belts a bit they are not going to lose to much in the short term. There children will. The bankers/ super rich globetrotting elite are doing quite nicely thankyou.

QE is just being absorbed by banks to rebuild themselves. Its not going into the rest of the economy.

An alternative was put forward by Ken Livingstone, that money should be printed ( for that is what QE is) to start a building programme of social housing -Keynesianism. Instead of giving it to banks.


----------



## leanderman (Mar 31, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> At the start of the crisis the Governor of the Bank of England was talking about "moral hazard" in relation to saving the banking system.
> 
> There were no "policies" as such. The aim was to save the bankers. The raft of measures brought in meant "moral hazard" had to be ditched.


*As I said, QE has winners and losers*


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 31, 2013)

leanderman said:


> *That should be part of government policy.*


 
Bit confused here.

Why the exclamation marks after the 30% getting hammered? Its hardly controversial comment.

QE has done nothing for the economy. I do not see that QE has helped to get the economy going again.

I do not understand what u mean by "cutting off your nose to spite your face"? I am starting to think that the crisis is going to be now a long lasting one. Things are going to get really bad for some people.

"Moral Hazard" was obviously ditched. Under "moral hazard" the banks that messed up should have been left to go under. That is how capitalism is supposed to work according to neo liberalist free markets. That is so obvious I do not understand why u say I am wrong. Please explain.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 31, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> Things are going to get really bad for some people.


They already have


----------



## mxh (Mar 31, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> .
> 
> The calculation is that whilst the middle classed might have to tighten there belts a bit they are not going to lose to much in the short term. There children will. The bankers/ super rich globetrotting elite are doing quite nicely thankyou.
> 
> ...


 
The Middle class are the next target as per the Cyprus haircut, along with small business.

I agree QE is just for the banks as they are probably insolvent, hence the now common atm computer glitches.

Shame no one else in government echoed Ken Livingston idea.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 31, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> They already have


 
Yes I know. Leanderman exclamation marks are possibly wrongly interpreted by me.

Or it goes back to my point that this government ( not the last one) is dealing with the crisis by hammering the bottom 30%.

It surprising ( or not) that a lot of this is invisible to the rest of society.

Unfortunately its only when people riot that they get taken notice of.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 31, 2013)

Found myself getting really depressed about a friend's situation over the weekend. They got wrongly cut off ESA and have been told it will be about 2 months before they get a penny. People on ESA are vulnerable people. I'm not surprised some kill themselves. It's really shit. There's been a rise in loan-sharking on estates. It just gets worse.


----------



## leanderman (Mar 31, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> Bit confused here.
> 
> Why the exclamation marks after the 30% getting hammered? Its hardly controversial comment.
> 
> Please explain.


 
Having problems editing posts.

The exclamation marks related to my doubt as to the contention that total collapse might have been preferable.

And not to the fact that 30 per cent of people are struggling, which is quite clearly true.

[/quote]


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 31, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> Unfortunately its only when people riot that they get taken notice of.


Will they have any fight in them? I doubt it.


----------



## mxh (Mar 31, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Found myself getting really depressed about a friend's situation over the weekend. They got wrongly cut off ESA and have been told it will be about 2 months before they get a penny. People on ESA are vulnerable people. I'm not surprised some kill themselves. It's really shit. There's been a rise in loan-sharking on estates. It just gets worse.


 
2 months is really poor, especially as it was done in error.

Last resort but the Foodbank deals with helping people in similar situations.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 31, 2013)

mxh said:


> Last resort but the Foodbank deals with helping people in similar situations.


You have to have a referral, you can't just rock up and ask.


----------



## mxh (Mar 31, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> You have to have a referral, you can't just rock up and ask.


 
I think the GP can do it.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 31, 2013)

mxh said:


> 2 months is really poor, especially as it was done in error.


They insist a letter was sent asking for the claimant to attend but they're insistent that it didn't arrive. This is the second time this has happened although the DWP admitted the first time they'd made a mistake but the claimant lost housing benefit which can't be paid back because they borrowed the money to pay the rent...it's just so shit.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Mar 31, 2013)

mxh said:


> I think the GP can do it.


I think they've got that covered now, can't remember who said they'd do the referral.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 31, 2013)

mxh said:


> The Middle class are the next target as per the Cyprus haircut, along with small business.
> 
> I agree QE is just for the banks as they are probably insolvent, hence the now common atm computer glitches.
> 
> Shame no one else in government echoed Ken Livingston idea.


 
I agree the middle class are next target. Some who work in public sector already are. Depends on how far this government thinks it can push it.

Here is what Ken said.





> *Ken Livingstone Former London Mayor* added that he wants a huge public house-building programme to help lift the economy out of depression.
> 
> He said: “Over the last four or five years the *Bank of England* has printed electronically £375 billion which has kept the banking system afloat.
> 
> ...


----------



## leanderman (Mar 31, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> Yes I know. Leanderman exclamation marks are possibly wrongly interpreted by me.
> 
> Or it goes back to my point that this government ( not the last one) is dealing with the crisis by hammering the bottom 30%.
> 
> ...


 
This point is spot on.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 31, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Found myself getting really depressed about a friend's situation over the weekend. They got wrongly cut off ESA and have been told it will be about 2 months before they get a penny. People on ESA are vulnerable people. I'm not surprised some kill themselves. It's really shit. There's been a rise in loan-sharking on estates. It just gets worse.


 
One of guys who hangs around Brixton I sometimes chat to has had his sickness benefit cut after seeing ATOS.

He is an ex soldier with arthritis.

He reckons when he appeals he will get it back. As he said a lot of people are winning on appeal. Its all the stress and time it takes.

Vulnerable people are being cut off.


----------



## leanderman (Mar 31, 2013)

The question is: Should we have prioritised our desire to punish bankers for their folly and greed  (and follow the precepts of moral hazard and laissez-faire economics)?

Or, as the BoE seems to think, avoid doing so because it would be counterproductive (cutting off the nose to spite the face).

It is unfortunate that the big winners with QE are the rich - but without the economy might have been in a worse state.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 31, 2013)

The BoE is hardly a neutral player here.


----------



## leanderman (Mar 31, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> The BoE is hardly a neutral player here.


 
I like to think they are doing what they think is right.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 31, 2013)

leanderman said:


> I like to think they are doing what they think is right.


 
The problem for us being that the B of E do not have a good history of actually "getting it right" when doing what they think is right. Norman and the Gold Standard spring to mind.


----------



## leanderman (Mar 31, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> The problem for us being that the B of E do not have a good history of actually "getting it right" when doing what they think is right. Norman and the Gold Standard spring to mind.


 
Absolutely, the BoE may be wrong on QE - and it is galling that it is 'enrichering' the rich - but the policy is a plausible one - and not one I think aimed solely at saving bankers.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 31, 2013)

leanderman said:


> I like to think they are doing what they think is right.


Very few (if any) people do what they think is wrong.


----------



## leanderman (Mar 31, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Very few (if any) people do what they think is wrong.


 
Maybe - I was replying to the suggestion that the Bank of England acts for the rich.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 31, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Maybe - I was replying to the suggestion that the Bank of England acts for the rich.


My proposal is that the decision-makers in the Bank of England are inherently always going to be people who think that the best course for the economy generally involves promoting the interests of the rich. I don't imagine they are doing it out of personal greed or anything, certainly.


----------



## leanderman (Mar 31, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> My proposal is that the decision-makers in the Bank of England are inherently always going to be people who think that the best course for the economy generally involves promoting the interests of the rich. I don't imagine they are doing it out of personal greed or anything, certainly.


 
Let's see if Mark Carney (ex- Goldman Sachs) is any better!


----------



## Gramsci (Apr 1, 2013)

leanderman said:


> The question is: Should we have prioritised our desire to punish bankers for their folly and greed (and follow the precepts of moral hazard and laissez-faire economics)?
> 
> Or, as the BoE seems to think, avoid doing so because it would be counterproductive (cutting off the nose to spite the face).
> 
> It is unfortunate that the big winners with QE are the rich - but without the economy might have been in a worse state.


 
The BoE was not that keen on bailing out the bankers. As I have posted before. I think the BoE was pressured by government to take action. It was supposed to be independent. But that was shelved when the crisis got serious.

This has nothing to do with punishing anyone. The market is supposed to work by "creative destruction" etc. Its not about "we" wanting to punish them. That is how the system is supposed to work. That is the mantra of neo liberal economics. There is a logic to it. It was not followed. For last 30 years its been what people have been told is the best way.


----------



## Gramsci (Apr 1, 2013)

leanderman said:


> The question is: Should we have prioritised our desire to punish bankers for their folly and greed (and follow the precepts of moral hazard and laissez-faire economics)?


 
Its not QE that is only measure being used. Among others is this recent brainwave from the government.




> The economic rationale for designing a mortgage market intervention in this way is almost impossible to understand. There are well-known market failures in both the retail and wholesale markets for mortgages, so there's plenty of scope for radical reform. But, instead of explaining what problem it is trying to solve and how, the Treasury has created yet another subsidy for banks. Worse still, the structure of the subsidy will weaken competition even further by propping up incumbent banks and perpetuating an unreconstructed housing finance market with fundamental weaknesses.
> What about housebuyers? To the extent that they see any benefits, it will push up demand and hence prices, resulting in further distortions in an already distorted market. This will redistribute wealth from the poor to the rich and from those who don't own houses to those who do. It will neither build any new houses nor make existing ones more "affordable" in any meaningful sense.
> Unfortunately, rather than tackling today's economic problems, this will simply sow the seeds of tomorrow's crisis.


----------



## shygirl (Apr 1, 2013)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Found myself getting really depressed about a friend's situation over the weekend. They got wrongly cut off ESA and have been told it will be about 2 months before they get a penny. People on ESA are vulnerable people. I'm not surprised some kill themselves. It's really shit. There's been a rise in loan-sharking on estates. It just gets worse.


 
When one of my yp was in this position, he claimed JSA pending the outcome of appeal against ESA being stopped.  Could your friend do this?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Apr 1, 2013)

As they're in the ESA support group they have some special advisor. I don't see them that often. Usually to give them some food.


----------



## leanderman (Apr 1, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> Its not QE that is only measure being used. Among others is this recent brainwave from the government.



This mortgage scheme is quite mad

The answer is to build. 

Apparently, only around 100,000 houses were built last year. 

I won't bore you again with the population figures to show how inadequate that figure is.


----------



## leanderman (Apr 1, 2013)

They decided the risks were too great, so suspended the usual rules. 

A few firms were allowed to be wiped out: Bear Stearns, Lehman and, notably, AIG, which was sacrificed to save Goldman Sachs.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Apr 1, 2013)

leanderman said:


> This mortgage scheme is quite mad
> 
> The answer is to build.
> 
> ...


 
100,000 nationwide, when we need that many in Greater London alone.


----------



## Effrasurfer (Apr 2, 2013)

Agenda item submission from a council tenant of long standing for our next TRA meeting:

_"One is the problem with Foxton’s sending unwanted letters to Council Tenants (and leaseholders) every month, they are getting on my t**s and probably on other’s too - we need to put pressure on Lambeth Living to make them stop it or find a way of taking direct action against them.  It is not right that they should entice tenants to break their tenancy agreements by offering them much more money than the tenants pay in rent to the Council.  Fraud is rife in Lambeth and it is a scam that has been allowed to continue for a long time. If Lambeth is truly serious about stamping it out they should start with places like Foxton’s.  Well, that’s my humble view."_


----------



## leanderman (Apr 2, 2013)

I don't understand this. How does the fraud work?


----------



## quimcunx (Apr 2, 2013)

presumably you sublet your council house for considerably more than you pay in rent. 

Some councils allow tenants to sublet providing it is for 'cost', I believe.


----------



## Gramsci (Apr 2, 2013)

leanderman said:


> They decided the risks were too great, so suspended the usual rules.
> 
> A few firms were allowed to be wiped out: Bear Stearns, Lehman and, notably, AIG, which was sacrificed to save Goldman Sachs.


 
Ah yes Goldman Sachs.

I few months ago on the news I heard someone from Goldman Sachs saying the crisis was caused by European governments over generous welfare spending. When the interviewer interjected this was not right he said the "structural deficit" caused by Gordon Brown and also other European governments was the problem. That the bankers (and Goldman Sachs) were not the problem.

He said the European workers had had it to easy.

These people ( and there companies) are really nasty pieces of work. They are ruthless. Even if on the surface they appear well mannered.


----------



## Rushy (Apr 2, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> Chatting to a Black guy I know recently. ( born in Brixton of Carribbean heritage). He did not have your confidence in the "positives". His view was that by the time the Black Cultural Archives building is finished there will not be any Black people left in Brixton with the way things are going.


To be fair, anything could happen in the time it will take to finish the BCA building.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Apr 2, 2013)

leanderman said:


> I don't understand this. How does the fraud work?


Because you sub-let your social housing which is defrauding the council. It's also defrauding the non-council tenant that's being sub-let to as they have no rights at all. They have no legal right to be there.


----------



## leanderman (Apr 2, 2013)

quimcunx said:


> presumably you sublet your council house for considerably more than you pay in rent.
> 
> Some councils allow tenants to sublet providing it is for 'cost', I believe.



Does Lambeth allow sub-letting of its properties? Does L&Q?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Apr 2, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Does Lambeth allow sub-letting of its properties? Does L&Q?


No. You can seek permission for a lodger and if you are going away for a short time, a house-sitter. It varies a bit from council to council and from HA to HA but not much.


----------



## AKA pseudonym (Apr 4, 2013)

'Class war' breaking out in Brixton over opening of new Foxtons estate agent



> 04 April 2013
> 
> "Class warfare" has broken out in Brixton over a new branch of Foxtons opening in the area.
> The estate agent opened on Brixton Road last month, causing some residents to complain of “gentrification”.
> ...


----------



## TruXta (Apr 4, 2013)

The comments are almost all awful.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Apr 4, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Does Lambeth allow sub-letting of its properties? Does L&Q?





Mrs Magpie said:


> No. You can seek permission for a lodger and if you are going away for a short time, a house-sitter. It varies a bit from council to council and from HA to HA but not much.


 
Longer. I know someone (L&Q) who let a friend have her place for a year while she studied abroad


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Apr 4, 2013)

AKA pseudonym said:


> 'Class war' breaking out in Brixton over opening of new Foxtons estate agent


 


> But now protests have taken a more extreme turn after abusive graffiti started appearing on the shop.
> Last week employees were shocked to find the words “yuppies out!” painted in capital letters across the floor-to-ceiling window.
> It comes after someone scrawled “yuck” across the glass the week before.


 


That truly is extreme.


----------



## editor (Apr 4, 2013)

The amount of people I hear in the pubs and clubs of Brixton plotting (or more likely, dreaming of) taking guerilla action against Foxtons...

**mentally wills them on


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 4, 2013)

editor said:


> The amount of people I hear in the pubs and clubs of Brixton plotting (or more likely, dreaming of) taking guerilla action against Foxtons...
> 
> **mentally wills them on


I would be a bit more guarded with comments like that, editor.
People died and lost their homes in fires caused by rioting in 2011 after commercial premises were targeted and set on fire.
You wouldn't want to appear to be tacitly approving acts that could result in such tragic consequences on a public messageboard, would you?


----------



## editor (Apr 4, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> I would be a bit more guarded with comments like that, editor.
> People died and lost their homes in fires caused by rioting in 2011 after commercial premises were targeted and set on fire.
> You wouldn't want to appear to be tacitly approving acts that could result in such tragic consequences on a public messageboard, would you?


 Guerilla action does not involve setting fire to property. That is *arson*. Guerilla action involves things like people all spontaneously deciding to go into Foxtons at the same time for a chat, or other such legal wheezes.


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 4, 2013)

Sounds like warfare to me


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 4, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> Sounds like warfare to me


get your ears tested then.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 4, 2013)

editor said:


> Guerilla action does not involve setting fire to property. That is *arson*. Guerilla action involves things like people all spontaneously deciding to go into Foxtons at the same time for a chat, or other such legal wheezes.








some guerrillas recently


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 4, 2013)

people outside foxtons a few years back (albeit foxtons in the angel)


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 4, 2013)

Ok you made your point. I'm just a bit worried about a repeat of the events of 2011


----------



## Rushy (Apr 4, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> some guerrillas recently


Yep - those are the guys I saw ordering a walnut and pickled beetroot salad and a round of bellinis in Foxtons last week.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 4, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> Ok you made your point. I'm just a bit worried about a repeat of the events of 2011


the only place the events of 2011 are going to be repeated is on the bbc.


----------



## editor (Apr 4, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> some guerrillas recently


Perhaps this will help some people understand the meaning of the phrase within the clear context set out in this thread:
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...a-artists-subverting-our-streets-1954614.html


----------



## editor (Apr 4, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> Sounds like warfare to me


Does it really? 


Rushy said:


> Yep - those are the guys I saw ordering a walnut and pickled beetroot salad and a round of bellinis in Foxtons last week.


Fucking guerilla yuppies. Taking over the place with their camouflaged hipster gear.


----------



## Rushy (Apr 4, 2013)

editor said:


> Does it really?
> 
> Fucking guerilla yuppies.


Guppies.


----------



## editor (Apr 4, 2013)

Rushy said:


> Guppies.


Kombat explosions all over the place!


----------



## Rushy (Apr 4, 2013)

editor said:


> Perhaps this will help some people understand the meaning of the phrase within the clear context set out in this thread:
> http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...a-artists-subverting-our-streets-1954614.html





> Painting on live snail shells, scrawling portraits on Metro tickets and eating meatballs out of potholes. Matilda Battersby discovers the guerrilla artists working today


 
Revolution is definitely in the air.


----------



## el-ahrairah (Apr 4, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> people outside foxtons a few years back (albeit foxtons in the angel)


 
"CLASS WAR YOUTH DEATH BRIGADE"


----------



## el-ahrairah (Apr 4, 2013)

TruXta said:


> The comments are almost all awful.


 
i love the fact that all the racists are blathering on about my hometown, Ilford.  There was a lot of it about when I was growing up.  Arses.


----------



## Gramsci (Apr 4, 2013)

el-ahrairah said:


> i love the fact that all the racists are blathering on about my hometown, Ilford. There was a lot of it about when I was growing up. Arses.


 
I noticed those comments. Appalling.


----------



## RushcroftRoader (Apr 5, 2013)

Just in case anyone was in any doubt about Foxtons... 
http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/28195477?search_identifier=2c3813764df4d7689999ff00948c42cb


----------



## CH1 (Apr 5, 2013)

RushcroftRoader said:


> Just in case anyone was in any doubt about Foxtons...
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/28195477?search_identifier=2c3813764df4d7689999ff00948c42cb


Lovely fireplace in picture 7 - but what is the use of two mini "kitchens" but no dining room?

I guess your complaint is the price is too high? Seems very high to me as well considering the "lived-in" state of the place.

Don't know if you blame Barratts, Foxtons or the buy-to-let brigade for all this.
Presumably on the Barratt Formula this property would yield 5% as a buy-to-let.
You won't get that in your NatWest savings account!

The only bubble inflating faster than Brixton property at the moment seems to be Bitcoin!


----------



## secateurz (Apr 5, 2013)

900 sq ft, 4 bedrooms, easily paid nowadays.

Last two years its just blown up beyond all reason..but like you say CH1 ...BTL yield is great compared to rest of London...and with mortgage rates at all time lows (<2% to fix with 40% deposit) its so much cheaper to buy than rent if you have the means.

haves vs have nots. tale as old as time.


----------



## Gramsci (Apr 5, 2013)

> Foxtons Yuppies Out row  In case you missed it, someone scrawled the words Yuppies Out in massive letters across the front of the new Foxtons. Our story on it has attracted dozens of comments, and the story's now been picked up by the Evening Standard and Time Out. Listen out for Blog editor Zoe speaking about the row on LBC tomorrow morning at 8.30am.


 
Brixton Blog will be on radio tomorrow morning


----------



## Gramsci (Apr 5, 2013)

Even the ES is now making sympathetic noises about rent controls. Or at least allowing them to be heard


----------



## leanderman (Apr 5, 2013)

It's got to that point.


----------



## Giles (Apr 5, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> The BoE was not that keen on bailing out the bankers. As I have posted before. I think the BoE was pressured by government to take action. It was supposed to be independent. But that was shelved when the crisis got serious.
> 
> This has nothing to do with punishing anyone. The market is supposed to work by "creative destruction" etc. Its not about "we" wanting to punish them. That is how the system is supposed to work. That is the mantra of neo liberal economics. There is a logic to it. It was not followed. For last 30 years its been what people have been told is the best way.


 
The problem is that allowing several of the major "High Street" banks to actually go bust doesn't just punish "the bankers" - all of their customers would have been hit.

We need something like the former US law (Glass-Steagall) totally separating the "utility" side of banking that everyone relies on and that genuinely "can't be allowed to fail" from the "investment wanking" side of things.

Giles..


----------



## ViolentPanda (Apr 6, 2013)

Giles said:


> The problem is that allowing several of the major "High Street" banks to actually go bust doesn't just punish "the bankers" - all of their customers would have been hit.


 
Not all. Depositors would have been covered up to about £70,000.



> We need something like the former US law (Glass-Steagall) totally separating the "utility" side of banking that everyone relies on and that genuinely "can't be allowed to fail" from the "investment wanking" side of things.


 
We had something, up until the late 1980s, when deregulation struck, and the "Chinese Walls" between investment and retail banking were removed.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Apr 9, 2013)

more paint attacks last night


----------



## editor (Apr 10, 2013)

Documented here with an entertaining verbal altercation betwixt an urbanite and a Foxtons man:
http://www.brixtonbuzz.com/2013/04/...red-foxtons-after-the-brixton-thatcher-party/


----------



## billythefish (Apr 10, 2013)

I saw they were putting up CCTV cameras this morning...


----------



## leanderman (Apr 10, 2013)

billythefish said:


> I saw they were putting up CCTV cameras this morning...



Considering CCTV in our road but council official told us it would result in lethal retaliation from a violent gang!


----------



## Rushy (Apr 10, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Considering CCTV in our road but council official told us it would result in lethal retaliation from a violent gang!


At least you'll catch their retaliation on film!


----------



## T & P (Apr 10, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Considering CCTV in our road but council official told us it would result in lethal retaliation from a violent gang!


What a monumental load of bollocks that is (not saying that it was you who made it up).


----------



## el-ahrairah (Apr 10, 2013)

billythefish said:


> I saw they were putting up CCTV cameras this morning...


 
something else to cover in paint.


----------



## Rushy (Apr 10, 2013)




----------



## King Biscuit Time (Apr 10, 2013)

Who's putting up CCTV? Foxtons or the police/council. If it's the former then you can bombard them with time wasting £10 freedom of information requests all day.


----------



## leanderman (Apr 10, 2013)

T & P said:


> What a monumental load of bollocks that is (not saying that it was you who made it up).



No, really - Lambeth CCTV chief claimed we would have to appear in court, identify ourselves etc, allowing mugger's mates to come round our houses, rape our wives and children before burning them all alive.


----------



## shakespearegirl (Apr 11, 2013)

After receiving YET another  piece of unsolicited junk mail from Foxtons yesterday, I took it into their office this morning and asked them to stop sending me letters..


----------



## Chilavert (Apr 11, 2013)

RushcroftRoader said:


> Just in case anyone was in any doubt about Foxtons...
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/28195477?search_identifier=2c3813764df4d7689999ff00948c42cb


They _are _estate agents!


----------



## Pat24 (Apr 11, 2013)

shakespearegirl said:


> After receiving YET another piece of unsolicited junk mail from Foxtons yesterday, I took it into their office this morning and asked them to stop sending me letters..


 
I got a letter from them yesterday, telling me that they have a company as a client that urgently needs rentals for their workforce on Josephine Avenue/Helix Rd/Arodene Rd.

It went straight into the recycling bin.


----------



## shakespearegirl (Apr 11, 2013)

Pat24 said:


> I got a letter from them yesterday, telling me that they have a company as a client that urgently needs rentals for their workforce on Josephine Avenue/Helix Rd/Arodene Rd.
> 
> Strangely they also have a corporate client who urgently needs rentals for their workforce on Merredene Street, Archbishops Place and Brading Road...


----------



## Rushy (Apr 11, 2013)

And Brixton Water Lane, Crownstone and St Matthews Rd.


----------



## Greebo (Apr 11, 2013)

Rushy said:


> And Brixton Water Lane, Crownstone and St Matthews Rd.


And this council estate.


----------



## Mosscha (Apr 11, 2013)

Misleading direct mail is covered by the Advertising Standards Authority. A formal complaint would require them to prove that they have all these clients or require them to stop.

I wouldn't feel justified smashing their windows until the responsible authorities had at least had an opportunity to uphold the law.


----------



## editor (Apr 23, 2013)

Trying to infect a council estate with their 'corporate clients.'  Kill them in the face now.  Fuck their spam and their shiny suits and the shitty 'wacky' cars that scuttle around like oversized festering rats.


----------



## snowy_again (Apr 23, 2013)

I received a house warming party invite in Southwyck House the other day. From an acquaintance who was determined to move into the new block next to the Laundrette/Granville Arcade. I thought it was all Social Housing, or has some been RTBuyed?


----------



## stuff_it (Apr 23, 2013)

Brixton Hatter said:


> more paint attacks last night


Those red lines look new, was it the road line painters?


----------



## gaijingirl (Apr 23, 2013)

snowy_again said:


> I received a house warming party invite in Southwyck House the other day. From an acquaintance who was determined to move into the new block next to the Laundrette/Granville Arcade. I thought it was all Social Housing, or has some been RTBuyed?


 
some must have been RTBuyed.. there was one up for sale a year or 2 ago.


----------



## Rushy (Apr 24, 2013)

gaijingirl said:


> some must have been RTBuyed.. there was one up for sale a year or 2 ago.


That was Southwyck House, Clapham. 
http://www.eigroup.co.uk/auctioneer-templates/LotDetails.aspx?LotID=645748&a=5&c=brn


----------



## editor (Apr 24, 2013)

The council are still pushing 'buy your council flat' leaflets at residents. The cunts.


----------



## simonSW2 (Apr 24, 2013)

editor said:


> Trying to infect a council estate with their 'corporate clients.' Kill them in the face now. Fuck their spam and their shiny suits and the shitty 'wacky' cars that scuttle around like oversized festering rats.
> 
> View attachment 31773


 
yeah, got a similar letter yesterday, different street names. Do these 'clients' actually exist or is it just a ruse to drum up some rental activity?

I notice the return address on the envelope is somewhere in Europe so I guess it's a very large scale national mailout operation by the spammy, devisive twunts.

I need a real world spam filter on my letterbox.


----------



## pissflaps (Apr 24, 2013)

..or you could pick up a dog poo with it and slot into the aircon-intake on one of thier minis.


----------



## gaijingirl (Apr 24, 2013)

Rushy said:


> That was Southwyck House, Clapham.
> http://www.eigroup.co.uk/auctioneer-templates/LotDetails.aspx?LotID=645748&a=5&c=brn


 
there was definitely one in the barrier block too.

There's another one here:

http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/27088901


----------



## Rushy (Apr 24, 2013)

gaijingirl said:


> there was definitely one in the barrier block too.
> 
> There's another one here:
> 
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/27088901


 
 I was joking. The estate agent said was advertising Southwyck House as being in Clapham.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Apr 24, 2013)

editor said:


> Trying to infect a council estate with their 'corporate clients.' Kill them in the face now. Fuck their spam and their shiny suits and the shitty 'wacky' cars that scuttle around like oversized festering rats.
> 
> View attachment 31773


Everyone in our street has had that letter too. Bollocks have they got loads of corporate tenants wanting to move in _fast_. Just another ruse to drum up business. And prices. 

Also, I don't really understand how they expect this to work. If you're a tenant like me, you'd just open this letter and chuck it in the bin. Why would you pass it on to your landlord? Unless it's a ruse to identify possible properties for sale...


----------



## ddraig (Apr 24, 2013)

worth them pissing 1000's off for 1 or 2 sales
to them of course


----------



## gaijingirl (Apr 24, 2013)

Rushy said:


> I was joking. The estate agent said was advertising Southwyck House as being in Clapham.


 
ah!  Got it now.. bit slow on the uptake today... 

That's hilarious though!


----------



## simonSW2 (Apr 24, 2013)

Brixton Hatter said:


> Everyone in our street has had that letter too. Bollocks have they got loads of corporate tenants wanting to move in _fast_. Just another ruse to drum up business. And prices.
> 
> Also, I don't really understand how they expect this to work. If you're a tenant like me, you'd just open this letter and chuck it in the bin. Why would you pass it on to your landlord? Unless it's a ruse to identify possible properties for sale...


 
That's what I thought - I wonder if are they contravening some sort of false advertising legislation ie - could they be legally told to pack the fuck in?


----------



## Rushy (Apr 26, 2013)

Brixton Hatter said:


> Everyone in our street has had that letter too. Bollocks have they got loads of corporate tenants wanting to move in _fast_. Just another ruse to drum up business. And prices.
> 
> Also, I don't really understand how they expect this to work. If you're a tenant like me, you'd just open this letter and chuck it in the bin. Why would you pass it on to your landlord? Unless it's a ruse to identify possible properties for sale...


 


simonSW2 said:


> That's what I thought - I wonder if are they contravening some sort of false advertising legislation ie - could they be legally told to pack the fuck in?


 

From the OFT Estate Agent's Guide:
​


> Misleading Statements​It is illegal to mislead buyers or sellers in any way.​In particular, you must not:​•give misleading information about offers for a​particular property, or invent bids - for example,​claim to have first time or cash buyers unless​you can show why you think this is true​•give misleading information about the​existence or status of any potential buyer -​for example, advertise or state that you have​potential buyers unless you can prove that this​is true.​Remember that a statement that is factually true​can be presented in a misleading way. You must​take care to avoid this​


​


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Apr 26, 2013)

billythefish said:


> I saw they were putting up CCTV cameras this morning...


 
spoilsports


----------



## Chilavert (May 1, 2013)

Foxtons has made the Telegraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/property...campaigners-protest-against-letting-fees.html


----------



## simonSW2 (May 1, 2013)

Chilavert said:


> Foxtons has made the Telegraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/property...campaigners-protest-against-letting-fees.html


 
_don't read the comments - don't read the commets - must not read comments - *reads comments* - *arrrrggghh*_

"If they don't like it they can go back to wherever they come from"
"What do people expect when there are two million illegal immigrants in the UK, mainly in the South-East region?"


----------



## leanderman (May 1, 2013)

Foxtons is loathsome. Colleague telling me last night how they encourage landlords to drive up rents - including his in Brixton

Apparently this happens on a six-month basis


----------



## mao (May 4, 2013)

_"In March, Foxtons opened branches in Brixton and in Mare Street, Hackney. There was immediately graffiti ("yuck" and "yuppies out"), but that, said Ben, who has worked for the company for some time, always happens. "We got the same thing in Shoreditch." There was some paint-splashing when Brixton celebrated the death of Margaret Thatcher, but recently, there have been protests outside specifically about rising rents in the area."_


----------



## DietCokeGirl (May 4, 2013)

I've noticed they park a whole load of their tacky minis on (I think) Trinity Gardens, by the BHF Furnature shop is. Nicking all the parking spots when there's no restrictions, cheeky gits.


----------



## el-ahrairah (May 4, 2013)

might wander past there next time i ave some paint on me.


----------



## equationgirl (May 5, 2013)

gaijingirl said:


> there was definitely one in the barrier block too.
> 
> There's another one here:
> 
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/27088901


Cash buyers only.


----------



## gaijingirl (May 5, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> Cash buyers only.


 
yes.. they often are - also concrete buildings and similar.


----------



## equationgirl (May 5, 2013)

gaijingirl said:


> yes.. they often are - also concrete buildings and similar.


Which will put many families out of the running if thy don't have a spare £250k in the bank. A great shame.

Not that Foxtons cares about that anyway.


----------



## gaijingirl (May 6, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> Which will put many families out of the running if thy don't have a spare £250k in the bank. A great shame.
> 
> Not that Foxtons cares about that anyway.


 
yes of course, that much is obvious.. but if you read back, you will see that I was merely confirming the fact that some of the flats in there had be RTBed, not commenting on it either way or relating it in any way to Foxtons for that matter.


----------



## equationgirl (May 6, 2013)

gaijingirl said:


> yes of course, that much is obvious.. but if you read back, you will see that I was merely confirming the fact that some of the flats in there had be RTBed, not commenting on it either way or relating it in any way to Foxtons for that matter.


Oh yes, sorry, I didn't mean you'd said anything like that, I think I was amazed at the price of that flat and it blew a circuit in my brain.


----------



## gaijingirl (May 6, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> Oh yes, sorry, I didn't mean you'd said anything like that, I think was amazed at the price of that flat and it blew a circuit in my brain.


 
how many people on urban these days?  maybe if we rummage really deep down the back of our collective sofas we could buy an urban flat?


----------



## equationgirl (May 6, 2013)

gaijingirl said:


> how many people on urban these days? maybe if we rummage really deep down the back of our collective sofas we could buy an urban flat?


I think we'd need more than a flat. We should buy Clifton Mansions, we might have enough room then. Maybe


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (May 6, 2013)

simonSW2 said:


> _don't read the comments - don't read the commets - must not read comments - *reads comments* - *arrrrggghh*_


 
I missed this post and read them 

What a shower of wankers


----------



## Badgers (May 8, 2013)

Avoid Foxtons (@AvoidFoxtons) tweeted at 11:26 PM on Wed, May 08, 2013:

Getting a few reports that Foxtons will be on BBC's Watchdog next week. Should be an interesting one.

(https://twitter.com/AvoidFoxtons/status/332260196040716288)


----------



## leanderman (May 9, 2013)

Unfortunately, a lot of people in Brixton disagree - and are letting these crooks try to sell or let their homes


----------



## CH1 (May 9, 2013)

Anybody spot this in Tuesday's Standard? Foxtons founder has bought the old Libyan Embassy in St James's (photo)
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/foreign-embassies-cash-in-on-rising-house-prices-8606088.html


----------



## leanderman (May 9, 2013)

CH1 said:


> Anybody spot this in Tuesday's Standard? Foxtons founder has bought the old Libyan Embassy in St James's (photo)
> http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/foreign-embassies-cash-in-on-rising-house-prices-8606088.html



Yep. and I recall Hunt did very well by selling Foxtons for a huge price just before the crash.


----------



## editor (May 15, 2013)

Cunts: http://www.brixtonbuzz.com/2013/05/...e-agent-parks-in-clearly-marked-disabled-bay/


----------



## Brixton Hatter (May 16, 2013)

editor said:


> Cunts: http://www.brixtonbuzz.com/2013/05/...e-agent-parks-in-clearly-marked-disabled-bay/


Yes, cunts. (You should have photographed the numberplate too. E2A: you did! RE62 YBM)

The Met police seem to think they're above the law too, illegally parking their cars on double yellow lines whilst they nip off to do their shopping, forcing cyclists and other roads users into the middle of the road, risking collision with vehicles coming the other way (Ferndale Road):


----------



## editor (May 20, 2013)

Might be worth watching the BBC London news today


----------



## editor (May 20, 2013)

I've emailed them this:


> Hi
> 
> One of your employees was spotted parking in a clearly labelled disabled bay in Morrish Road, Streatham SW2.
> 
> ...


----------



## TruXta (May 20, 2013)

editor said:


> I've emailed them this:


Oooooo exciting!


----------



## el-ahrairah (May 20, 2013)

jolly good show old bean


----------



## Chilavert (May 20, 2013)

Saw a couple of their estate agents walking up towards their office this morning; I didn't know they were estate agents but given their sharp suits it seemed likely.

Needless to say I was right.


----------



## passivejoe (May 20, 2013)

editor said:


> I've emailed them this:


 
Surely taking action requires them / the manager to already know of the offence?


----------



## editor (May 20, 2013)

passivejoe said:


> Surely taking action requires them / the manager to already know of the offence?


I forwarded them the article: http://www.brixtonbuzz.com/2013/05/...e-agent-parks-in-clearly-marked-disabled-bay/


----------



## snowy_again (May 20, 2013)

Chilavert said:


> Saw a couple of their estate agents walking up towards their office this morning; I didn't know they were estate agents but given their sharp suits it seemed likely.
> 
> Needless to say I was right.


 
They've taken to parking the minis on the pay & display places at the top of Mervan Road by Windrush Sq. at the moment - there were 3 or 4 lined up last week when I walked that way before their offices opened. 

Have they changed how the cars are registered, as before I seem to remember they were business vehicles and therefore weren't allowed to be parked on the road at night (or something).


----------



## editor (May 20, 2013)

snowy_again said:


> They've taken to parking the minis on the pay & display places at the top of Mervan Road by Windrush Sq. at the moment - there were 3 or 4 lined up last week when I walked that way before their offices opened.
> 
> Have they changed how the cars are registered, as before I seem to remember they were business vehicles and therefore weren't allowed to be parked on the road at night (or something).


Grab some pics if you can!


----------



## editor (May 21, 2013)

Foxtons have just been bought up by the multi-billion, multi-national private equity firm, BC Partners (formerly Baring Capital Investors - yes, as in Barings Bank). All jolly nice people, no doubt.

http://www.foxtons.co.uk/news/2007/05/sale-of-foxtons-and-alexander-hall.html


----------



## gabi (May 21, 2013)

Like they couldnt get any more cunty...

Did they respond to your email about the disabled bay?


----------



## editor (May 21, 2013)

gabi said:


> Like they couldnt get any more cunty...
> 
> Did they respond to your email about the disabled bay?


Don't be daft.


----------



## editor (May 21, 2013)

Oh, I've got a reply: 



> Dear =====
> 
> Thank you for your email.  We appreciate you taking the time to write to us, however, I can confirm that we are already aware of the incident and the matter is currently being dealt with in accordance with our internal company procedures.
> 
> ...


I think they should publicly apologise myself. What do you reckon?


----------



## leanderman (May 21, 2013)

This is not quite as bad - but people without kids always park in the family slots at Acre Lane Tesco. 

And no one waits for you get off a busy Tube carriage. 

And, and ...


----------



## shakespearegirl (Jun 15, 2013)

This takes the Foxtons biscuit!

My old flat, sold in Feb 2011 for £270,000, now on the market for £495,000.

They haven't even redecorated!

http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?cen...SS&sold=1&submit_type=search#resources_holder

That flat downstairs sold for £250,000 last year so I'm not sure what has caused the sudden escalation in Loughborough junction property values


----------



## editor (Jun 15, 2013)

That is so depressing.


----------



## Manter (Jun 15, 2013)

They are notorious for getting listings by giving huge valuations, which they then persuade you to drop after about 6 weeks and then again before they get to the end of the exclusivity period. But even so that is a very large number (albeit looks like a nice flat)


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 15, 2013)

They have it in Herne Hill, not Loughborough junction, presumably because it's on shakespeare rd. It is depressing though, half a million for a flat.


----------



## Manter (Jun 15, 2013)

That whole estate agent moving area boundaries thing makes me laugh. My old flat (halfway up Brixton road) was sold to me as 'oval'- when I sold it, it was firmly 'Brixton'. And it hadn't moved an inch....


----------



## shakespearegirl (Jun 15, 2013)

Technically it is in Herne Hill, I sold it through a Herne Hill agent.

I can't believe they'll get anywhere near that.

It was a nice flat but def at the sketchy end of Shakespeare Road.


----------



## Frumious B. (Jun 15, 2013)

A 2 bed flat in Rushcroft Road is on the market for 460. Apparently that's a realistic price.


----------



## jwfone (Jun 15, 2013)

shakespearegirl said:


> This takes the Foxtons biscuit!
> 
> My old flat, sold in Feb 2011 for £270,000, now on the market for £495,000.
> 
> ...


 

I expect the massive hike is due to: 
1. The new Tesco Metro almost next door, which I imagine has sanitised Loughborough Junction in the eyes of people who could afford to pay over £450K for a two bedroom flat.
2. Foxtons having a number of flats down that end and if they massively inflate the price on each of them then this not only appears to justify each one's price, but also drags that property and the whole local market upwards via anchoring http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring - which benefits this and future sales in the area. 
3. More certainty about the developments on Somerleyton Road.
While I'm very happy to heap any kind of criticism on Foxtons, spare a thought for the sellers who appear to be happy to make a £200K profit after 2 years without adding any real value and for no effort. Foxtons are merely the facilitators of this greed.


----------



## jamieo (Jun 15, 2013)

The whole Foxtons baiting is very tiresome.

Some of you guys need to be more tolerant.

They have had a Foxtons in Streatham for many years without people getting their knickers in a twist.

Do they charge too much commission or is their decor too dazzling?


----------



## pissflaps (Jun 15, 2013)




----------



## CH1 (Jun 15, 2013)

jwfone said:


> I expect the massive hike is due to:
> 1. The new Tesco Metro almost next door, which I imagine has sanitised Loughborough Junction in the eyes of people who could afford to pay over £450K for a two bedroom flat.
> 2. Foxtons having a number of flats down that end and if they massively inflate the price on each of them then this not only appears to justify each one's price, but also drags that property and the whole local market upwards via anchoring http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring - which benefits this and future sales in the area.
> 3. More certainty about the developments on Somerleyton Road.
> While I'm very happy to heap any kind of criticism on Foxtons, spare a thought for the sellers who appear to be happy to make a £200K profit after 2 years without adding any real value and for no effort. Foxtons are merely the facilitators of this greed.


1. Since when was a Tesco Metro so cute(ly sized)? They have normally only two copies of Radio Times a week - though if you want the FT you'll probably be lucky.
2. Your point on anchoring was very interesting
3. Surely you mean the incipient Brixton Square buy-toilet rentals coming on-stream? Somerleyton is not due for Town Planning committee until May 2015 with work to begin on the theatre site in August 2015 - according to the meeting I attended this morning. There is a council election and a general election before all that happens.


----------



## jamieo (Jun 15, 2013)

I have lived in Brixton for 12 years and finally bought my own flat in Brixton nearly 3 years ago, from Foxtons who were based outside Brixton at the time, I found them very good too deal with, the agent was decent, and before that I had spent a lot of time dealing mostly with Haart and Eden Harper. And had been messed around with a bit; especially from Haart.

Do people on here think they should have decor more in line with traditional agents such as Keating etc? Is neon frowned upon?


----------



## CH1 (Jun 15, 2013)

jamieo said:


> The whole Foxtons baiting is very tiresome.
> Some of you guys need to be more tolerant.
> They have had a Foxtons in Streatham for many years without people getting their knickers in a twist.
> Do they charge too much commission or is their decor too dazzling?


Foxtons are driving up property prices unreasonably - much to the disadvantage of purchasers (or even for those already homeowners needing to move).
Foxtons sales staff don't care about ripping people off as long as they get their commission.


----------



## CH1 (Jun 15, 2013)

jamieo said:


> I have lived in Brixton for 12 years and finally bought my own flat in Brixton nearly 3 years ago, from Foxtons who were based outside Brixton at the time, I found them very good too deal with, the agent was decent, and before that I had spent a lot of time dealing mostly with Haart and Eden Harper. And had been messed around with a bit; especially from Haart.
> 
> Do people on here think they should have decor more in line with traditional agents such as Keating etc? Is neon frowned upon?


Your experience was before property prices in Brixton doubled. If you were buying now it would be a different story I think.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 15, 2013)

jamieo said:


> I have lived in Brixton for 12 years and finally bought my own flat in Brixton nearly 3 years ago, from Foxtons who were based outside Brixton at the time, I found them very good too deal with, the agent was decent, and before that I had spent a lot of time dealing mostly with Haart and Eden Harper. And had been messed around with a bit; especially from Haart.
> 
> Do people on here think they should have decor more in line with traditional agents such as Keating etc? Is neon frowned upon?


 
It's not their decor it's their sales practices.


----------



## Manter (Jun 15, 2013)

jamieo said:


> I have lived in Brixton for 12 years and finally bought my own flat in Brixton nearly 3 years ago, from Foxtons who were based outside Brixton at the time, I found them very good too deal with, the agent was decent, and before that I had spent a lot of time dealing mostly with Haart and Eden Harper. And had been messed around with a bit; especially from Haart.
> 
> Do people on here think they should have decor more in line with traditional agents such as Keating etc? Is neon frowned upon?


Oh yeah, it's the neon, it's all about the neon.....


----------



## snowy_again (Jun 16, 2013)

jamieo said:


> I have lived in Brixton for 12 years and finally bought my own flat in Brixton nearly 3 years ago, from Foxtons who were based outside Brixton at the time, I found them very good too deal with, the agent was decent, and before that I had spent a lot of time dealing mostly with Haart and Eden Harper. And had been messed around with a bit; especially from Haart.
> 
> Do people on here think they should have decor more in line with traditional agents such as Keating etc? Is neon frowned upon?


 
Plonker.


----------



## colacubes (Jun 16, 2013)

jamieo said:


> I have lived in Brixton for 12 years and finally bought my own flat in Brixton nearly 3 years ago, from Foxtons who were based outside Brixton at the time, I found them very good too deal with, the agent was decent, and before that I had spent a lot of time dealing mostly with Haart and Eden Harper. And had been messed around with a bit; especially from Haart.
> 
> Do people on here think they should have decor more in line with traditional agents such as Keating etc? Is neon frowned upon?


 
Cool story bro.


----------



## gabi (Jun 16, 2013)

jamieo said:


> I have lived in Brixton for 12 years and finally bought my own flat in Brixton nearly 3 years ago, from Foxtons who were based outside Brixton at the time, I found them very good too deal with, the agent was decent, and before that I had spent a lot of time dealing mostly with Haart and Eden Harper. And had been messed around with a bit; especially from Haart.
> 
> Do people on here think they should have decor more in line with traditional agents such as Keating etc? Is neon frowned upon?


 
They're something along the lines of a pantomime villian. I think it's more what they represent than what they actually do. A bit like when the Starbucks opened.

I've dealt with both them and Keatings in the past. They are no worse. Both are vile tbh.


----------



## jwfone (Jun 16, 2013)

jamieo said:


> I have lived in Brixton for 12 years and finally bought my own flat in Brixton nearly 3 years ago, from Foxtons who were based outside Brixton at the time, I found them very good too deal with, the agent was decent, and before that I had spent a lot of time dealing mostly with Haart and Eden Harper. And had been messed around with a bit; especially from Haart.
> 
> Do people on here think they should have decor more in line with traditional agents such as Keating etc? Is neon frowned upon?


 

I can see that my feelings about Foxtons might appear to be prejudice. However, when we bought our Gresham Road flat via them 6 years ago
- They thought it was a good idea to take us round flats that were significantly outside our stated price range - one was 60K over our budget. The agent seemed genuinely surprised when I said that our budget was actually the money we could afford and not just a negotiating tactic. So in my view encourage people to spend more than they can afford.
- They initially priced the flat at 25% more than any flat had ever sold in the road before (on a road with a couple of sales each year). So in my view have form for driving prices up.
- Lied to us about the reason why the seller had decided to drop the price (we know this because our solicitor and the seller's solicitor got on well). It's not a mortal sin, but it's unpleasant when you talk to someone you know is lying.

I don't have much experience of estate agents so don't know how typical the above is of other firms, or indeed of Foxtons. But I took a strong dislike to them, even though they did have an awesome website.


----------



## jamieo (Jun 16, 2013)

CH1 said:


> Foxtons are driving up property prices unreasonably - much to the disadvantage of purchasers (or even for those already homeowners needing to move).
> Foxtons sales staff don't care about ripping people off as long as they get their commission.


 

It's a free market.

They will only sell property for what people are prepared to pay. In that regard they are no different from Keatings, Haart, Eden Harper, Martin Barry Partnership etc etc.

Martin Barry Partnership also had properties for sale in my region recently for circa 500k, crazy stuff.

All estate agents are there to get a sale between between the seller and the buyer. And usually estate agents get their commission off the seller so their first obligation is to get the best sale price possible. All estate agents are the same in that regard.

I found my dealings with Foxtons in 2010 to be brilliant, there was a couple of issues in the purchase (bank valuations w****** etc) which could have derailed things, but the Foxtons guy was helpful as regards the buyer end and things worked out. It could be said that since then with the whole 'Brixton Village' thing and Starbucks etc that I am "quids in", but that is the same for all estate agents.

I would like an anti-Haart's thread please.

I found them unhelpful, horrendous, and some properties ended up becoming an auction rather than a sale.

You often read in recent years that prices in Brixton have been rising by about 15% year on year. Thereby bucking the London and national trend. That is an across the market trend and not just Foxtons. It's a free market, and a free world, people just need to be more tolerant of that.

Like I said, if Streatham can survive many years with having a Foxtons, then I'm sure Brixton will survive.


----------



## Rushy (Jun 16, 2013)

jwfone said:


> I can see that my feelings about Foxtons might appear to be prejudice. However, when we bought our Gresham Road flat via them 6 years ago
> - They thought it was a good idea to take us round flats that were significantly outside our stated price range - one was 60K over our budget. The agent seemed genuinely surprised when I said that our budget was actually the money we could afford and not just a negotiating tactic. So in my view encourage people to spend more than they can afford.
> - They initially priced the flat at 25% more than any flat had ever sold in the road before (on a road with a couple of sales each year). So in my view have form for driving prices up.
> - Lied to us about the reason why the seller had decided to drop the price (we know this because our solicitor and the seller's solicitor got on well). It's not a mortal sin, but it's unpleasant when you talk to someone you know is lying.
> ...


 
Fair enough. But if Foxtons was overvaluing compared to what was available with other agents, why did you buy through them in the end? Back then, Foxtons had not yet made inroads into Brixton as a main player.

Sometimes people have unrealistic expectations of what they can get for their money and many do find extra cash to stretch their budget to buy something a little nicer when they have seen what is available - I guess agents don't know up front who that will be. They also take people to overpriced shitty flats beforehand to make the last one they take you to look like better value. You have to remember they are not acting for you. They are acting for the vendor. It is their job to get the best price they can. They are salespeople and although they should not lie it would be naive to expect that any agent will hold your hand through the process. There is no obligation on a buyer to buy - if it is overpriced, walk away.


----------



## jamieo (Jun 16, 2013)

jwfone said:


> I can see that my feelings about Foxtons might appear to be prejudice. However, when we bought our Gresham Road flat via them 6 years ago
> - They thought it was a good idea to take us round flats that were significantly outside our stated price range - one was 60K over our budget. The agent seemed genuinely surprised when I said that our budget was actually the money we could afford and not just a negotiating tactic. So in my view encourage people to spend more than they can afford.
> - They initially priced the flat at 25% more than any flat had ever sold in the road before (on a road with a couple of sales each year). So in my view have form for driving prices up.
> - Lied to us about the reason why the seller had decided to drop the price (we know this because our solicitor and the seller's solicitor got on well). It's not a mortal sin, but it's unpleasant when you talk to someone you know is lying.
> ...


That's fair enough.

Estate agents generally have the the worst rep of almost any trade going. From my many years of renting from them all the way back to my student days, they are almost globally disliked (add Bushells to my list of bad estate agents for those days). They are generally unqualified as an industry and little more than a chimp in a suit.

But from my experience, I found them (Foxtons) a lot better than other local Brixton estate agents to deal with.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Jun 16, 2013)

YUPPIES OUT


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Jun 16, 2013)

That's the short version.

The longer version is: jamieo read the whole thread before assuming we don't like Foxtons cos they have a neon office.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 16, 2013)

jamieo said:


> The whole Foxtons baiting is very tiresome.


 
You're entitled to your opinion. I'm entitled to mine that Foxtons need baiting at every opportunity.



> Some of you guys need to be more tolerant.


 
We don't *need* to be anything, Adolf.



> They have had a Foxtons in Streatham for many years without people getting their knickers in a twist.


 
Really? Without people getting their knickers in a twist? How far back did you look to see if that was actually the case, if you checked at all?

I'm guessing a couple of years at most.  Or you'd have known from the off that you were chatting shite.

Still, perhaps you're an estate agent, in which case you'd be well up on chatting shite, eh?




> Do they charge too much commission or is their decor too dazzling?


 
"Dazzling"? Quotidian, corporate and invasive, perhaps.  As for "too much", it's about shoddy business practices, as anyone who pays a modicum of attention to such things is well aware.


----------



## mxh (Jun 16, 2013)

Noticed a few properties that have a Foxton's sold sign in the last few days, hope the vendors qualified for their 0% commission deal.


----------



## jwfone (Jun 16, 2013)

Rushy said:


> But if Foxtons was overvaluing compared to what was available with other agents, why did you buy through them in the end?


 
No-one else put in an offer on the flat, so after some time the seller accepted our lower offer (which we felt was a reasonable one). Foxtons were the only agent for the property.



Rushy said:


> They are acting for the vendor. It is their job to get the best price they can.


 
I agree that one shouldn't forget the vendor, in the case mentioned initially, it appears they think it reasonable to make a £200K profit over 2 years with no apparent material improvements to the property. In my view that's greed, and ignoring the negative consequences of such huge prices increases e.g. I assume it encourages property speculation. The agent facilitates this and possibly encourages it, but I think the vendor bears responsibility.



Rushy said:


> There is no obligation on a buyer to buy - if it is overpriced, walk away.



True that if someone's willing to pay then there's no robbery. But I wonder if property isn't an unusual case as
1. Most buyers will be using a mortgage and so the extra cost doesn't seem as real - it just adds to the years you'll be paying off the debt. Maybe the rise in house prices in relation to earnings http://monevator.com/house-price-to-earnings-ratio-2012/ reflects an increased willingness of a) lenders to lend higher multiples of earnings, b) buyers to take on more debt, rather than lenders & buyers having to adapt to rising prices?
2. Many buyers are likely to be unfamiliar with buying property and so not able to accurately judge what is a fair price, especially in a situation like Brixton over the last few years.

I.e. with 1 & 2 it's easier for vendors & agents to get away with overpricing than it would be if they were selling fruit & vegetables?


----------



## leanderman (Jun 16, 2013)

jwfone said:


> Maybe the rise in house prices in relation to earnings http://monevator.com/house-price-to-earnings-ratio-2012/ reflects an increased willingness of a) lenders to lend higher multiples of earnings, b) buyers to take on more debt, rather than lenders & buyers having to adapt to rising prices??


 
very good article



jwfone said:


> Many buyers are likely to be unfamiliar with buying property and so not able to accurately judge what is a fair price, especially in a situation like Brixton over the last few years.?


 
Exactly. And whenever you buy, the market is crazy with little choice.


----------



## Rushy (Jun 17, 2013)

jwfone said:


> No-one else put in an offer on the flat, so after some time the seller accepted our lower offer (which we felt was a reasonable one). Foxtons were the only agent for the property.


 
So they thought it was worth more and the market proved them wrong. That's ok, isn't it? Property pricing is not an exact science.



> I agree that one shouldn't forget the vendor, in the case mentioned initially, it appears they think it reasonable to make a £200K profit over 2 years with no apparent material improvements to the property. In my view that's greed, and ignoring the negative consequences of such huge prices increases e.g. I assume it encourages property speculation. The agent facilitates this and possibly encourages it, but I think the vendor bears responsibility.


 
If the market has moved on spectacularly then what is greedy about the vendor selling at the new market price? If they are asking too much, then it won't sell (see above).

If it is greedy, how much return can you make per year without it being greedy?




> True that if someone's willing to pay then there's no robbery. But I wonder if property isn't an unusual case as
> 1. Most buyers will be using a mortgage and so the extra cost doesn't seem as real - it just adds to the years you'll be paying off the debt. Maybe the rise in house prices in relation to earnings http://monevator.com/house-price-to-earnings-ratio-2012/ reflects an increased willingness of a) lenders to lend higher multiples of earnings, b) buyers to take on more debt, rather than lenders & buyers having to adapt to rising prices?
> 2. Many buyers are likely to be unfamiliar with buying property and so not able to accurately judge what is a fair price, especially in a situation like Brixton over the last few years.
> 
> ...


[/QUOTE]


I agree that people often don't think of mortgages as real money but the banks who lend the money don't look at it like that. If a mortgage is involved, so is a professional valuer and often a surveyor. They are acting for the bank to make sure a buyer they are lending to is paying a reasonable market price and that the building is generally sound. Again, pricing is not an exact science. Surveyors look for recent comparables and make a judgement on whether prices are currently on an upward or downward trend. Inexperienced buyers should probably engage the services of a surveyor themselves but most see this as an unnecessary cost, particularly when they are already paying for the bank to use one.

To be fair - no one is able to judge Brixton's frothy prices accurately at the moment which is why people are trying their luck to some extent. It will settle over the next couple of months as we start to see what prices have been achieved rather than what was advertised. Nevertheless, the increases will have been large.


----------



## shakespearegirl (Jun 17, 2013)

http://www.proviser.com/regional/postcodes/se24/property-prices/compare-last-12-months/

This shows se24 increased by 9.7 percent last year, not nearly 50 percent as Foxtons seem to believe.


----------



## T & P (Jun 17, 2013)

As discussed much earlier in the thread, Foxtons appear to be notorious for stitching up other estate agents by offering ludicrously high sale prices to sellers and securing them as clients. Then after many months without a sale, Foxtons will recommend lowering the asking price to a sensible level- probably to what all the other agents had estimated in the first place. They don't care much about this, as the main objective was to steal customers from other agents.

They are also as bad as god-botherers when it comes to unsolicited knocks on the door. When my boss, who was selling a nice house in the leafiest part of Putney- basically estate agent porn- put the house on the market, he got so many knocks on the door by the parasitic tossers he eventually had to start to tell them to fuck off in no uncertain terms.

They deserve all the contempt they get IMO.


----------



## CH1 (Jun 18, 2013)

shakespearegirl said:


> http://www.proviser.com/regional/postcodes/se24/property-prices/compare-last-12-months/
> 
> This shows se24 increased by 9.7 percent last year, not nearly 50 percent as Foxtons seem to believe.


Surely this pre-dates Foxtons Brixton office's efforts? They opened on March 9th - and surely those stats are based on prices registered at the Land Registry up to 31st March for actual purchases.
Doesn't it take at least a month between putting in an offer, doing searches, exchanging contracts and completion? Always used to in my day.


----------



## Rushy (Jun 18, 2013)

CH1 said:


> Surely this pre-dates Foxtons Brixton office's efforts? They opened on March 9th - and surely those stats are based on prices registered at the Land Registry up to 31st March for actual purchases.
> Doesn't it take at least a month between putting in an offer, doing searches, exchanging contracts and completion? Always used to in my day.


 
Quite often 2-3months - 5 weeks is fast. Prices in Jan-March will be sales from October-Dec. There has been a marked increase since then.


----------



## leanderman (Jun 18, 2013)

Rushy said:


> Quite often 2-3months - 5 weeks is fast. Prices in Jan-March will be sales from October-Dec. There has been a marked increase since then.



Certainly in asking prices: friend with 3-bed house on Appach was told to
list at £630,000 nine months ago - but £790,000 now. Same agent.


----------



## Peanut Monkey (Jun 18, 2013)

Foxton's are selling the place near to us. They initially put it on for £425,000, which is ridiculous.
They've now dropped it by £45,000 and it's under offer but that's still crazy money for where we are.

http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?key...word&search_type=SS&sold=1&submit_type=search


----------



## CH1 (Jun 18, 2013)

Peanut Monkey said:


> Foxton's are selling the place near to us. They initially put it on for £425,000, which is ridiculous.
> They've now dropped it by £45,000 and it's under offer but that's still crazy money for where we are.


Price seems incredible but surely this is driven by comparison with Barratts a few yards up the road.
Barratts will no doubt have all the en-suite crap, and state of the art thermal insulation with low fuel bills. And tiny rooms. It's a trade off between living somewhere "traditional" looking and paying big fuel bills or paying big service charges and maybe big council tax in a bland gated development.
Nice to see Loughborough Park Conservation Area getting it's place in the sun at last. I remember my partner of the time being asked in 1986 "why did he move to the ass-hole of Brixton?" 
[Another near neighbour]


----------



## uk benzo (Jun 18, 2013)

Peanut Monkey said:


> Foxton's are selling the place near to us. They initially put it on for £425,000, which is ridiculous.
> They've now dropped it by £45,000 and it's under offer but that's still crazy money for where we are.
> 
> http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?key...word&search_type=SS&sold=1&submit_type=search


 
Who the fuck can afford to buy a 2 bed flat for 380k?


----------



## Badgers (Jun 18, 2013)

uk benzo said:
			
		

> Who the fuck can afford to buy a 2 bed flat for 380k?



Wealthy folk.


----------



## ChrisFilter (Jun 18, 2013)

uk benzo said:


> Who the fuck can afford to buy a 2 bed flat for 380k?



With one room for the kitchen and lounge. On Coldharbour Lane.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 18, 2013)

uk benzo said:
			
		

> Who the fuck can afford to buy a 2 bed flat for 380k?



Who the fuck can afford to rent this type of flat (for £350-400pw + bills and fees) in a similar location? That would be roughly £20k a year just on rent. They are selling and being let though?


----------



## pissflaps (Jun 18, 2013)

klounges can fuck off.

>>>>>


----------



## leanderman (Jun 18, 2013)

uk benzo said:


> Who the fuck can afford to buy a 2 bed flat for 380k?


 

Oh there is plenty of money about.

In the past six months, two neighbours have left behind (and let out) flats of that value so they can go on to buy another place to live in.

Their transient tenants won't give a toss about the community.


----------



## uk benzo (Jun 18, 2013)

In 5 years time, there'll be no one left who will understand the cultural significance of Windrush square, Marcus Garvey way, Frantz Fanon house etc.


----------



## Libertad (Jun 18, 2013)

Max Roach Park.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 18, 2013)

Inveztmentz iz seriuZ BIZNEZZ 

www.vanillaicerealestate.com/home-mobile


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Jun 19, 2013)

Badgers said:


> Who the fuck can afford to rent this type of flat (for £350-400pw + bills and fees) in a similar location? That would be roughly £20k a year just on rent. They are selling and being let though?


 
I make about the national average wage (less than the London average) and I could afford that (with someone sharing), if I was prepared to fork out half my income on rent. Which I think some people are tbh, to live in what they see as an exciting area. Or get a couple of couples in there and it's not that much.


----------



## Frumious B. (Jun 19, 2013)

Rents in the gentrified buildings in Rushcroft Road are similar to the above - c. £1600 pcm + bills for a spacious 2 bed or a cramped 3 bed. I have my flat all to myself, so I have no money for anything but food. My neighbours, 4 of 'em, occupy the same amount of space as me, and they can afford to go out boozing etc.


----------



## Chilavert (Jun 19, 2013)

One of the double fronted house on Brixton Water Lane (just behind the Hoot) was on the market for £1.2m and I noticed it had a sold board up this morning.  Not with Foxtons (KFH I think), but pricey nonetheless...


----------



## Peanut Monkey (Jun 19, 2013)

ChrisFilter said:


> With one room for the kitchen and lounge. On Coldharbour Lane.


 
They also neglect to mention the railway line about 20 yards from the lounge windows...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 19, 2013)

uk benzo said:


> In 5 years time, there'll be no one left who will understand the cultural significance of Windrush square, Marcus Garvey way, Frantz Fanon house etc.


 
We're not allowed to say things like this, because it makes the incomers feel put upon, or so they keep whining.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 19, 2013)

Chilavert said:


> One of the double fronted house on Brixton Water Lane (just behind the Hoot) was on the market for £1.2m and I noticed it had a sold board up this morning. Not with Foxtons (KFH I think), but pricey nonetheless...


 
TBF they've been high value since the late '80s (when the more derelict-ish ones got tarted up). Still, £1.2 million is a bit fucking staggering, isn't it?


----------



## leanderman (Jun 19, 2013)

Pretty sure the TV/radio comedian who owned it told me he paid about half that only a few (4/5) years ago.


----------



## leanderman (Jun 19, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> TBF they've been high value since the late '80s (when the more derelict-ish ones got tarted up). Still, £1.2 million is a bit fucking staggering, isn't it?



The gardens are outlandish. Over a 100ft. And wwwwide.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 19, 2013)

leanderman said:


> The gardens are outlandish. Over a 100ft. And wwwwide.


 
I went to a party back in the mid-eighties in one of the houses opposite the entrance to the park, and yep, MASSIVE bloody gardens.


----------



## el-ahrairah (Jun 19, 2013)

jamieo said:


> I have lived in Brixton for 12 years and finally bought my own flat in Brixton nearly 3 years ago, from Foxtons who were based outside Brixton at the time, I found them very good too deal with, the agent was decent, and before that I had spent a lot of time dealing mostly with Haart and Eden Harper. And had been messed around with a bit; especially from Haart.
> 
> Do people on here think they should have decor more in line with traditional agents such as Keating etc? Is neon frowned upon?


 

chinny reckon.


----------



## leanderman (Jun 19, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> I went to a party back in the mid-eighties in one of the houses opposite the entrance to the park, and yep, MASSIVE bloody gardens.



Ex-neighbours who backed on to our house now own the one right opposite the park gate. City type with a Labour MP as a sister.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 19, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Ex-neighbours who backed on to our house now own the one right opposite the park. City type with a Labour MP as a sister.


 
Not something he boasts about nowadays, I suspect.


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 20, 2013)

jamieo said:


> It's a free market.
> 
> 
> It's a free market, and a free world, people just need to be more tolerant of that.


 
Free market and free world are different things.

Last 30 years of so called free market has led to increase in inequality for example.


----------



## T & P (Jun 20, 2013)

It might be possible that jamieo might have been on a troll...


----------



## Greebo (Jun 20, 2013)

T & P said:


> It might be possible that jamieo might have been on a troll...


 
In which case, they won't mind taking what the average troll gets back.


----------



## clandestino (Jun 20, 2013)

T & P said:


> It might be possible that jamieo might have been on a troll...


 
Foxtons employee I reckon.


----------



## clandestino (Jun 20, 2013)

jamieo said:


> The whole Foxtons baiting is very tiresome.
> 
> Some of you guys need to be more tolerant.
> 
> ...


 
That's not true at all. The Streatham branch of Foxtons only opened a couple of years ago and it was greeted with the same mistrust and hostility as the Brixton one, certainly amongst people I talk to. And the effect they've had on the area has been terrible - driving up prices, ramping up greed, leaving vendors with houses they're unable to sell because they've been put on at an inflated price. Foxtons are evil, money-grabbing cunts, and we don't need to be more tolerant of that at all.


----------



## T & P (Jun 20, 2013)

ianw said:


> Foxtons employee I reckon.


Christ, it's sad enough to be a universally loathed Foxtons agent in charge of selling & renting property at hyperinflated prices. But to be delegated to fight PR wars for the company on message boards is particularly tragic.


----------



## Manter (Jun 20, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Not something he boasts about nowadays, I suspect.


not sure supporting labour is unacceptable in City circles any more.  Labour politicians are hardly socialists any more


----------



## Manter (Jun 20, 2013)

uk benzo said:


> Who the fuck can afford to buy a 2 bed flat for 380k?


if you can find a way to afford to buy it is a hell of a lot cheaper than renting.  Plus you are building up some sort of investment, so I can see why people sell their souls to do it.  That ranges from deposit/mortgage guarantee from bank of mum and dad (who often remortgage, or delay retirement to fund it- we're not talking liquidate a trust fund, we're talking scratching together any money possible), deposits made up of inheritances (7k from the sale of Granny's house she'd lived in for 40 years in Stoke will do enough to tip people over the affordability threshold), buying with relatives/friends, buying something small/grim completely out of area and using that to be a first step because rates, deposit requirements etc are better if you're not a first time buyer (I know someone who bought a tiny cottage in Derby years ago because he couldn't afford to buy in London, has been renting it out and is planning to sell in a few months to generate a deposit for an even tinier flat in London) etc etc.


----------



## leanderman (Jun 20, 2013)

Manter said:


> if you can find a way to afford to buy it is a hell of a lot cheaper than renting. Plus you are building up some sort of investment, so I can see why people sell their souls to do it. That ranges from deposit/mortgage guarantee from bank of mum and dad (who often remortgage, or delay retirement to fund it- we're not talking liquidate a trust fund, we're talking scratching together any money possible), deposits made up of inheritances (7k from the sale of Granny's house she'd lived in for 40 years in Stoke will do enough to tip people over the affordability threshold), buying with relatives/friends, buying something small/grim completely out of area and using that to be a first step because rates, deposit requirements etc are better if you're not a first time buyer (I know someone who bought a tiny cottage in Derby years ago because he couldn't afford to buy in London, has been renting it out and is planning to sell in a few months to generate a deposit for an even tinier flat in London) etc etc.


 

Yes. But I think it is relatively a lot more costly to get on the ladder than ever before.

Especially for those from outside London.

And, yawn, it's because we are building far too few houses to meet a London population growing by 110,000 a year.


----------



## Manter (Jun 20, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Yes. But I think it is relatively a lot more costly to get on the ladder than ever before.
> 
> Especially for those from outside London.
> 
> And, yawn, it's because we are building far too few houses to meet a London population growing by 110,000 a year.


 oh yeah, completely agree.... my point was just that the people who do buy are not all oligarchs/ landed gentry/ city hot shots- there are 'normal' people who buy by putting themselves and their families under enormous pressure and by making huge sacrifices- because they have bought into the home owning dream


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 20, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> Free market and free world are different things.
> 
> Last 30 years of so called free market has led to increase in inequality for example.


 
The problem with most people who spout "free market" rhetoric, is that they're invariably too shallow to have actually explored the effects of the free market, or too greedy to give a fuck about the effects.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 20, 2013)

ianw said:


> That's not true at all. The Streatham branch of Foxtons only opened a couple of years ago and it was greeted with the same mistrust and hostility as the Brixton one, certainly amongst people I talk to. And the effect they've had on the area has been terrible - driving up prices, ramping up greed, leaving vendors with houses they're unable to sell because they've been put on at an inflated price. Foxtons are evil, money-grabbing cunts, and we don't need to be more tolerant of that at all.


 
TBF, according to folks I knew in SW11, even Nappy Valley had an "oh fuck" moment when Foxtons first rocked up in Lavender Hill, and that was ages ago.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 20, 2013)

Manter said:


> not sure supporting labour is unacceptable in City circles any more. Labour politicians are hardly socialists any more


 
Actually, I meant admitting being involved in politics. It's a bit like admitting you indulge in sordid sexual acts with a tube of toothpaste and a squeegee.


----------



## Manter (Jun 20, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Actually, I meant admitting being involved in politics. It's a bit like admitting you indulge in sordid sexual acts with a tube of toothpaste and a squeegee.


I thought plastic bags and oranges were traditional....


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 20, 2013)

Manter said:


> I thought plastic bags and oranges were traditional....


 
Bit passé since Milligan choked while choking his chicken, though.


----------



## DietCokeGirl (Jun 20, 2013)

Here's a story about Foxtons: A couple I know decided it was time to think about renting a bigger flat. They viewed one about 5pm, decide to think about it overnight, called landlord the next morning to sign and he said it was no longer available, because a rep from Foxtons had told him they could rent it for 150 quid a week more than he was charging.


----------



## CH1 (Jun 23, 2013)

Noticed 11 Foxton's boards in Dalyell Road - most saying "Sold subject to contract" at the bottom.
At their typical asking price looks like a potential £100,000 commission (plus £20,000 to the VAT man) in just one street. Not bad for 3 months work at the Brixton office! 
BTW did anyone note the article in the Standard yesterday about the "bidding frenzy" at a London auction this week?


----------



## leanderman (Jun 23, 2013)

CH1 said:


> Noticed 11 Foxton's boards in Dalyell Road - most saying "Sold subject to contract" at the bottom.
> At their typical asking price looks like a potential £100,000 commission (plus £20,000 to the VAT man) in just one street. Not bad for 3 months work at the Brixton office!
> BTW did anyone note the article in the Standard yesterday about the "bidding frenzy" at a London auction this week?



yep. saw that but auction guides have been far too low for ages.


----------



## CH1 (Jun 23, 2013)

leanderman said:


> yep. saw that but auction guides have been far too low for ages.


I suppose auction guide prices work the opposite way round to Foxton's sale prices.
Low guide prices tempt the punters in - to recklessly out-bid each other.
Foxton's for sale prices panic people into buying/selling in case prices will go up more/drop back?


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Jun 23, 2013)

DietCokeGirl said:


> Here's a story about Foxtons: A couple I know decided it was time to think about renting a bigger flat. They viewed one about 5pm, decide to think about it overnight, called landlord the next morning to sign and he said it was no longer available, because a rep from Foxtons had told him they could rent it for 150 quid a week more than he was charging.


 
I have difficulty in seeing how this story reflects badly on Foxtons.


----------



## DietCokeGirl (Jun 23, 2013)

Silas Loom said:


> I have difficulty in seeing how this story reflects badly on Foxtons.


Clear case if them pushing up rents, encouraging landlords to charge more, a lot more.


----------



## leanderman (Jun 23, 2013)

CH1 said:


> I suppose auction guide prices work the opposite way round to Foxton's sale prices.
> Low guide prices tempt the punters in - to recklessly out-bid each other.
> Foxton's for sale prices panic people into buying/selling in case prices will go up more/drop back?


 

Neighbour told me today that the Foxton's 0% thing and their carpetbombing is about trying to corner the supply of houses for sale so they are in a position to dictate (higher) prices.

They would expect to lose money in the first six months of opening an office. And then cash in later.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jun 23, 2013)

jamieo said:


> They have had a Foxtons in Streatham for many years without people getting their knickers in a twist.


 
I pointed out ages ago how poncey it looked


----------



## leanderman (Jun 23, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I pointed out ages ago how poncey it looked


 

I quite like the design of the Brixton office.

It's what they do to tenants and rents that is the scandal.

In terms of property sales alone, they are probably little worse than their rivals.


----------



## cuppa tee (Jun 23, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Neighbour told me today that the Foxton's 0% thing and their carpetbombing is about trying to corner the supply of houses for sale so they are in a position to dictate (higher) prices.
> 
> They would expect to lose money in the first six months of opening an office. And then cash in later.



Being owned by a global financial group gives them the edge in this respect,


----------



## Manter (Jun 23, 2013)

leanderman said:


> In terms of property sales alone, they are probably little worse than their rivals.


Recent experience suggests their business model involves stretching the rules and then stretching them a tiny bit more.  And if they get caught... they'll shrug, and pay the fine, they'll have made enough money by pushing the envelope to that point they don't care a lot.  

And interestingly, I can find the front pages of a couple of judgements I remember but all the links are broken....


----------



## editor (Jun 23, 2013)

The Office Of Fair Trading have a whole page dedicated to Foxtons. 
http://www.oft.gov.uk/OFTwork/consu...rcement-completed/foxtons/qandas#.UcdhhVxwp8F


----------



## editor (Jun 23, 2013)

More here: 


> In his judgement, District Judge Parfitt noted that the Landlord has signed Foxtons standard terms and conditions in which one stand alone clause made reference to the charge but also noted that there were no other clauses that related to a service that Foxtons would provide in producing the tenancy agreement. The judge also preferred the Landlord's factual evidence that she was not informed of the charge prior to signing Foxtons standard agreement.
> 
> The Judge went on to say: “It seems to me that Foxtons were neither asked to, nor obliged to, provide a tenancy agreement...accordingly Foxtons had no right or entitlement to be able to charge the claimant in respect of a service which they had not been asked to provide, i.e. the provision of a tenancy agreement.” The judge also refused Foxton's application for permission to appeal.


http://www.sghmartineau.com/pressre...t-case-against-UK-estate-agency/#.UcdiFFxwp8E


----------



## leanderman (Jun 23, 2013)

editor said:


> More here:
> 
> http://www.sghmartineau.com/pressre...t-case-against-UK-estate-agency/#.UcdiFFxwp8E


 

and now £499,000 for a two-bed flat. the world has gone mad.

http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/29447955?search_identifier=701012eac608167c1bb0ef348ae9cf66


----------



## Belushi (Jun 23, 2013)

Yeah. nice flat but half a million pounds?!


----------



## leanderman (Jun 23, 2013)

Belushi said:


> Yeah. nice flat but half a million pounds?!


 

It's astonishing.

I know the sellers pretty well: he's a government lawyer, they have a baby.

They are desperate to stay in Brixton but can't afford a bigger place and are moving out to Sydenham.

Even up to a year or so ago, such a family would have been able to move up the ladder around here. No more.


----------



## gaijingirl (Jun 23, 2013)

leanderman said:


> It's astonishing.
> 
> I know the sellers pretty well: he's a government lawyer, they have a baby.
> 
> ...


 

that's what happened to us over a year ago and a number of our friends who had their babies the same time as us - including friends on Leander Road.  We searched for a good long time as well.


----------



## nagapie (Jun 24, 2013)

gaijingirl said:


> that's what happened to us over a year ago and a number of our friends who had their babies the same time as us - including friends on Leander Road. We searched for a good long time as well.


 

My area still has houses that are cheaper than central Brixton. Although some chancer is trying to sell theirs for over a million, unlikely when most of the others are under half of that. Maybe it's Foxtons.


----------



## gaijingirl (Jun 24, 2013)

nagapie said:


> My area still has houses that are cheaper than central Brixton. Although some chancer is trying to sell theirs for over a million, unlikely when most of the others are under half of that. Maybe it's Foxtons.


 

well as you know, we looked at many houses down your streets...


----------



## nagapie (Jun 25, 2013)

gaijingirl said:


> well as you know, we looked at many houses down your streets...


 

But they're selling their Leander Rd flat for £500,000! Of course I don't know what they initially paid for it but if they've had it for more than 3 years it'll have gone up a lot. Maybe sizing up from a 2 bedroom flat with a garden to a 3 bedroom house with a garden is not enough space gain.


----------



## leanderman (Jun 25, 2013)

The gap between a flat and a house has grown, even allowing for inflation. It was, say, £300k for a flat and £500k for a house. Now it's £500k and £800k. It's hard to imagine most people affording either.


----------



## CH1 (Jun 25, 2013)

leanderman said:


> The gap between a flat and a house has grown, even allowing for inflation. It was, say, £300k for a flat and £500k for a house. Now it's £500k and £800k. It's hard to imagine most people affording either.


Maybe they are anticipating the Mortgage Guarantee scheme which starts in January next year.
The Guardian 23rd March: "The new scheme will run for three years from January 2014 and will see the government give lenders who offer low-deposit mortgages the chance to buy a guarantee on the portion of the mortgage between 80% and 95%. That means that if a borrower gets into financial difficulty and their property is repossessed, the government will cover a chunk of the lender's losses."


----------



## Winot (Jun 25, 2013)

leanderman said:


> The gap between a flat and a house has grown, even allowing for inflation. It was, say, £300k for a flat and £500k for a house. Now it's £500k and £800k. It's hard to imagine most people affording either.


 
I guess those are asking prices - it remains to be seen what the gap in sales prices are.

Our house was valued recently as I needed to remortgage for a business loan.  The value according to the bank was probably 20% lower than the 'market asking price'.


----------



## leanderman (Jun 25, 2013)

Winot said:


> I guess those are asking prices - it remains to be seen what the gap in sales prices are.
> 
> Our house was valued recently as I needed to remortgage for a business loan. The value according to the bank was probably 20% lower than the 'market asking price'.


 

Yep. Same with us.

I doubt they will get £499,000.

But, an ex-colleague has just moved into an identical, tho' dilapidated, flat ten doors down from there, and she paid £460,000.


----------



## leanderman (Jun 27, 2013)

Three days later: SOLD


----------



## simonSW2 (Jun 27, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Three days later: SOLD


Must have been close to asking price then. Jesus.


----------



## shakespearegirl (Jul 9, 2013)

http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?cen...word&search_type=SS&sold=1&submit_type=search

Mmm somewhat overpriced Foxtons, now dropped by £30k


----------



## leanderman (Jul 11, 2013)

The madness continues: Two bedrooms, 900sq ft: £630,000!

http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/29618044?search_identifier=ec1c517d7a4c3a37f54277fa733dfd6f


----------



## nagapie (Jul 11, 2013)

leanderman said:


> The madness continues: Two bedrooms, 900sq ft: £630,000!
> 
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/29618044?search_identifier=ec1c517d7a4c3a37f54277fa733dfd6f


 

They're chancing it, they'll never get that.


----------



## shakespearegirl (Jul 12, 2013)

nagapie said:


> They're chancing it, they'll never get that.


 

With a postage stamp garden!


----------



## Manter (Jul 12, 2013)

I'd never make an estate agent- I just don't understand the pricing- this one for £450 is minute http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?key...word&search_type=SS&sold=1&submit_type=search


----------



## pissflaps (Jul 12, 2013)

loungekitchen

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


----------



## Manter (Jul 12, 2013)

whereas this one- six bedroomed renovation job- is less than a million.  OK, it'd eat about that in renovation costs, but its a huge house with lots of period features in zone 2......if you compare it value wise to some of the tiddly little ones at £750+ I am a bit baffled
http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?key...word&search_type=SS&sold=1&submit_type=search


----------



## Manter (Jul 12, 2013)

pissflaps said:


> loungekitchen
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


reception room/kitchen, please


----------



## Badgers (Jul 12, 2013)

We should keep checking their advertising and reporting anything that contravenes the property misdescriptions act.


----------



## mxh (Jul 12, 2013)

Manter said:


> I'd never make an estate agent- I just don't understand the pricing- this one for £450 is minute http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?keyword_type=street_name&keyword_value=Brixton Road&property_id=856757&search_form=keyword&search_type=SS&sold=1&submit_type=search


 
They can price it for what they like but the finance companies will be reluctant to give a mortgage if similar nearby properties have not achieved those prices.


----------



## Manter (Jul 12, 2013)

mxh said:


> They can price it for what they like but the finance companies will be reluctant to give a mortgage if similar nearby properties have not achieved those prices.


Another flat in that block sold for £289 last year....


----------



## Winot (Jul 12, 2013)

Manter said:


> whereas this one- six bedroomed renovation job- is less than a million. OK, it'd eat about that in renovation costs, but its a huge house with lots of period features in zone 2......if you compare it value wise to some of the tiddly little ones at £750+ I am a bit baffled
> http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?keyword_type=street_name&keyword_value=Brixton Road&property_id=860106&resource=thumbnails&search_form=keyword&search_type=SS&sold=1&submit_type=search


 
Agree, bizarre.  You (well, not me, but Rushy) could turn that basement into a stand-alone flat.  And handy for the Crown & Anchor!


----------



## Vibrant-Hubb (Jul 13, 2013)

The two properties mentioned are in areas of Brixton Road where there is/was a lot of deprivation. Also they are a bit far from both Oval and Brixton tubes. I used to know someone in the reconstructed building (a shell a few years ago, where the two bed flat is) and those houses attracted a lot of burglaries. This is not to denigrate the locality, but these great big private houses look like shipwrecks surrounded by architectural wreckage from the 70s. It makes an awkward juxtapostion and makes the houses attract attention, including criminal.

Search terms: Brixton Road, Foxton's, high crime, overpriced.


----------



## Manter (Jul 13, 2013)

Vibrant-Hubb said:


> The two properties mentioned are in areas of Brixton Road where there is/was a lot of deprivation. Also they are a bit far from both Oval and Brixton tubes. I used to know someone in the reconstructed building (a shell a few years ago, where the two bed flat is) and those houses attracted a lot of burglaries. This is not to denigrate the locality, but these great big private houses look like shipwrecks surrounded by architectural wreckage from the 70s. It makes an awkward juxtapostion and makes the houses attract attention, including criminal.
> 
> Search terms: Brixton Road, Foxton's, high crime, overpriced.


I know, I used to live 2 doors down...still doesn't straighten out the comparative prices


----------



## CH1 (Jul 15, 2013)

From Clapton:


----------



## cuppa tee (Jul 15, 2013)

Manter said:


> whereas this one- six bedroomed renovation job- is less than a million.  OK, it'd eat about that in renovation costs, but its a huge house with lots of period features in zone 2......if you compare it value wise to some of the tiddly little ones at £750+ I am a bit baffled
> http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?key...word&search_type=SS&sold=1&submit_type=search





Vibrant-Hubb said:


> The two properties mentioned are in areas of Brixton Road where there is/was a lot of deprivation. Also they are a bit far from both Oval and Brixton tubes. I used to know someone in the reconstructed building (a shell a few years ago, where the two bed flat is) and those houses attracted a lot of burglaries. This is not to denigrate the locality, but these great big private houses look like shipwrecks surrounded by architectural wreckage from the 70s. It makes an awkward juxtapostion and makes the houses attract attention, including criminal.
> 
> Search terms: Brixton Road, Foxton's, high crime, overpriced.



The 6 bedroom house is now sold.


----------



## Manter (Jul 15, 2013)

cuppa tee said:


> The 6 bedroom house is now sold.


Yup- which is the only reason I haven't faked my income to have a good look round


----------



## Cowley (Jul 16, 2013)

nagapie said:


> They're chancing it, they'll never get that.


 
Crazy!!! I can remember when those Houses on Elm Park sold for similar prices to Flats on the Road around 10 years ago or so, me and the Mrs looked at one, nearly bought one but walked away due to it needing too much work doing to it.

630K for these now? LOL!!!!!


----------



## Cowley (Jul 16, 2013)

cuppa tee said:


> The 6 bedroom house is now sold.


 Not surprising, I imagine a developer has bought it and will go about renovating. Then Foxtons or one of the agents will pick it up and start selling the 2 beds at 500K or whatever crazy price people pay for flats these days.

I can't imagine a "well to do" family would ever consider buying a House there, wrong location, too noisy, busy road etc.  It's also a few steps away from the Stockwell Park Estate, not sure what that Estate is like these days, but I frequently use to visit a friend who use to live there a few years back and that Estate wasn't a pretty sight, especially at weekends.


----------



## cuppa tee (Jul 29, 2013)

New man in charge at Foxtons apparently.......

http://news.sky.com/story/1121696/former-durex-chief-takes-reins-at-foxtons


----------



## jakejb79 (Jul 29, 2013)

cuppa tee said:


> New man in charge at Foxtons apparently.......
> 
> http://news.sky.com/story/1121696/former-durex-chief-takes-reins-at-foxtons



Nice to know you're being fucked over safely I guess....


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 29, 2013)

I've got to say, the Foxton's website is great from a design point of view, someone did a really good job on it.


----------



## pissflaps (Jul 30, 2013)

is it? it's responsive, but that's about all i can see that would recommend it.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Sep 9, 2013)

Foxtons apparently opening in Crystal Palace next month. We've started getting 'do you want to sell your house' letters.


----------



## leanderman (Sep 9, 2013)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Foxtons apparently opening in Crystal Palace next month. We've started getting 'do you want to sell your house' letters.



Friends of mine down there say they and the locals are delighted.


----------



## editor (Sep 9, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Friends of mine down there say they and the locals are delighted.


What, all of them, as one?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 9, 2013)

leanderman said:


> The madness continues: Two bedrooms, 900sq ft: £630,000!
> 
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/29618044?search_identifier=ec1c517d7a4c3a37f54277fa733dfd6f



Is that the one that was laying derelict for decades?


----------



## leanderman (Sep 9, 2013)

editor said:


> What, all of them, as one?



Obviously not 'as one'.

But, still, that is what they said.

And to be clear, these friends are not wealthy types.


----------



## leanderman (Sep 9, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Is that the one that was laying derelict for decades?



not sure.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 9, 2013)

leanderman said:


> not sure.



Actually, I've a feeling it's not.  I'm sure neighbour said something about the council finally doing something but huge amounts of work was needed because of almost antique plumbing and electrics.  Think it may be a property a few doors away.  Will have to check with neighbour


----------



## leanderman (Sep 9, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Actually, I've a feeling it's not.  I'm sure neighbour said something about the council finally doing something but huge amounts of work was needed because of almost antique plumbing and electrics.  Think it may be a property a few doors away.  Will have to check with neighbour



Seems to be unsold. Mad price.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 9, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Seems to be unsold. Mad price.



It's not even as nice as the one in Leander Road that was *only *£499k


----------



## leanderman (Sep 9, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> It's not even as nice as the one in Leander Road that was *only *£499k



Very suspicious about that £499 figure, so out of line with other selling prices and so conveniently below the stamp duty threshold.


----------



## mao (Sep 9, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Friends of mine down there say they and the locals are delighted.



I live in Crystal Palace (some of my friends too) and I can assure you that WE are not delighted. Foxtons can fuck off.


----------



## leanderman (Sep 9, 2013)

mao said:


> I live in Crystal Palace (some of my friends too) and I can assure you that WE are not delighted. Foxtons can fuck off.



I don't doubt it. I am only reporting what my friends said.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 9, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Very suspicious about that £499 figure, so out of line with other selling prices and so conveniently below the stamp duty threshold.



This one's £450k

http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/30302853?search_identifier=5f16667e7511cb7de8549da26808144d

and that's 1st floor flat, so not even a garden


----------



## leanderman (Sep 9, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> This one's £450k
> 
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/30302853?search_identifier=5f16667e7511cb7de8549da26808144d



Good point. You are talking about flats. 

I was thinking of the Leander Rd house that officially sold last year for £499k.

That £499k is now the price for a Leander flat shows how awry things have got.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 9, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Good point. You are talking about flats.
> 
> I was thinking of the Leander Rd house that officially sold last year for £499k.
> 
> That £499k is now the price for a Leander flat shows how awry things have got.



2-bedroomed flat in Endymion for £499k as well

http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/30092825?search_identifier=9f8ce16d60c70697e0b9c3745c5c0869


----------



## Glitter (Sep 9, 2013)

I know I live up North but these prices are just madness to me! 

It astounds me how anyone can charge or pay that!


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 9, 2013)

and one in Helix Road (2 bedroomed flat) for £535k

http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/30314368?search_identifier=f7290651cdd02ce1ddce0a3231acfcb0


Can't believe there's so few properties available in these few streets.  Years ago, there were loads showing up


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 9, 2013)

and another 2-bedder for £550 in Arodene Road

http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/30253788?search_identifier=0d0bab37874d7aec15a34cb4c058f78b


----------



## leanderman (Sep 9, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> 2-bedroomed flat in Endymion for £499k as well
> 
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/30092825?search_identifier=9f8ce16d60c70697e0b9c3745c5c0869



Few people gain from this, even homeowners, who have to live somewhere.

And, if they need a family house, they now have to move out, because the steps up in London are now too large.

More important, the high selling prices drive up rents for everyone else.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 9, 2013)

Outrageous.  £450 for 1 bedroom on Brailsford, but you get free flowers in the garden.  Not sure if the cat comes with it

http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/30009516?search_identifier=0d0bab37874d7aec15a34cb4c058f78b


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 9, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Few people gain from this, even homeowners, who have to live somewhere.
> 
> And, if they need a family house, they now have to move out, because the steps up in London are now too large.
> 
> More important, the high selling prices drive up rents for everyone else.



I know, I'm disgusted by these prices

Most of these flats are more expensive than my friend's 3-bedroomed house, but that is in Thornton Heath 

Maybe your lawyer friend should move to Thornton Heath


----------



## editor (Sep 9, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Obviously not 'as one'.
> 
> But, still, that is what they said.
> 
> And to be clear, these friends are not wealthy types.


I don't think any of my friends would be "delighted" by a Foxtons opening up in their town. Why would they? Their presence almost always heralds the start of house prices rising.


----------



## leanderman (Sep 9, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> and one in Helix Road (2 bedroomed flat) for £535k
> 
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/30314368?search_identifier=f7290651cdd02ce1ddce0a3231acfcb0
> 
> ...



A writer on the Economist blog a couple of weeks back commented on this area.

He/she pointed out that, unlike Lambeth generally, where the 'White British' population has plummeted by 30 per cent in a decade, in the Brixton Hill area, it has actually gone up.


----------



## editor (Sep 9, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Outrageous.  £450 for 1 bedroom on Brailsford, but you get free flowers in the garden.  Not sure if the cat comes with it
> 
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/30009516?search_identifier=0d0bab37874d7aec15a34cb4c058f78b


Love the estate agent gush: 





> How perfectly lovely! The current owner of this generous one bedroom period conversion has created a magically bohemian living environment.


----------



## leanderman (Sep 9, 2013)

editor said:


> I don't think any of my friends would be "delighted" by a Foxtons opening up in their town. Why would they? Their presence almost always heralds the start of house prices rising.



I shall disassociate myself from them immediately. They are dead to me.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 9, 2013)

leanderman said:


> A writer on the Economist blog a couple of weeks back commented on this area.
> 
> He/she pointed out that, unlike Lambeth generally, where the 'White British' population has plummeted by 30 per cent in a decade, in the Brixton Hill area, it has actually gone up.



Wouldn't surprise me.  Would be good if there were figures available.  Census would probably only show figures by council I'm guessing?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 9, 2013)

editor said:


> Love the estate agent gush:



The estate agent seems to love the living room considering how many pictures they've stuck up of it


----------



## leanderman (Sep 9, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Wouldn't surprise me.  Would be good if there were figures available.  Census would probably only show figures by council I'm guessing?



The ONS figures break down to ward level I think. It's fascinating and there is a good summary here http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/Services/CouncilDemocracy/StatisticsCensusInformation/

Lambeth wide, the 'white British' population is down from 50 per cent of the total to 39 per cent, which looks more like a 22 per cent fall to me.

The 'black Caribbean' population has fallen in a similar, if not quite such extreme way, from 12 per cent to 10 per cent.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 9, 2013)

Interesting


Lambeth is a young borough. It has the second highest proportion of single people in the country, and the second lowest proportion of married couples (although it is the 6th highest in terms of civil partnerships in the country)
Lambeth has the highest number of young house-sharers in the country, reflecting a change in the actual accommodation on offer in the borough (49% up from 45% are converted/shared flats) and a higher proportion of private renters (up from 18% to 28%)

Has the highest number of rastafarians as well


----------



## leanderman (Sep 9, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Interesting
> 
> 
> Lambeth is a young borough. It has the second highest proportion of single people in the country, and the second lowest proportion of married couples (although it is the 6th highest in terms of civil partnerships in the country)
> ...




The two bullet points are why we have so many Sainsbury Locals etc.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 9, 2013)

leanderman said:


> I don't doubt it. I am only reporting what my friends said.


Why are they delighted?


----------



## leanderman (Sep 9, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> Why are they delighted?



Because they know that Foxtons will, as the editor points out, push up house prices in Crystal Palace.

As I keep pointing out, they are wrong to think this a good thing.


----------



## editor (Sep 9, 2013)

I can't say I'd want to hang out with people who delight in people getting priced out of their own communities by the rampant house-price-inflating machine that is Foxtons.


----------



## leanderman (Sep 9, 2013)

editor said:


> I can't say I'd want to hang out with people who delight in people getting priced out of their own communities by the rampant house-price-inflating machine that is Foxtons.



I'm a broad church


----------



## shifting gears (Sep 9, 2013)

At a guess, these'll be 'young professionals', recently bought their first property, would rather have lived more central, but this'll do until they can sell it on, or until they want to rent it out etc. they probably aren't from London, more likely the Home Counties, they're university educated, work hard, play hard, have little to no interest in engaging with the local community, can't see how rising house prices can in any way be a negative thing, because how can it be when it benefits them? 

Do I win £5 ? 

(And while that may sound like every cliche in the book - I actually know people like that, so don't be offended!)


----------



## Gramsci (Sep 9, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Interesting
> 
> 
> Lambeth is a young borough. It has the second highest proportion of single people in the country, and the second lowest proportion of married couples (although it is the 6th highest in terms of civil partnerships in the country)
> ...



This is of interest as well. Shows that medium and low income households make up 73% of Lambeth households. Shows a real need for affordable housing. 

 Lambeth also has a "Housing Strategy"

This was agreed at Cabinet 9th July 2012. It covers all forms of housing- private rental, RSL and Council.

Started to look through it more. There is info on Lambeth on pages 17 and 18

It shows that the majority of people in Lambeth are not high waged, that those on Council waiting list increased, that there is need for smaller units and there is a projected shortfall of 6000 units. 

So definitely there is a case for more affordable housing at Target Rents.


> Need and demand for housing
> The number of people who have applied for social housing in Lambeth (excluding transfers from our own and/or housing association stock) has increased by over 75% since 2006 – to 27,000 in March 2012. In December 2011 just over 9,000 households in Lambeth (6.8%) received housing
> benefit support to live in the private rented sector. The number of housing benefit claimants in the private rented sector increased by close to 200 people between February and December 2011, when changes to the Local Housing Allowance started to take effect. Over 60% of those living in our own council stock receive housing benefit.
> 
> ...


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 9, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> This is of interest as well. Shows that medium and low income households make up 73% of Lambeth households. Shows a real need for affordable housing.
> 
> Lambeth also has a "Housing Strategy"
> 
> ...




Shame the powers that be seem to be sticking their heads in the sand about the need for more 1 bedroom flats


----------



## leanderman (Sep 9, 2013)

shifting gears said:


> At a guess, these'll be 'young professionals', recently bought their first property, would rather have lived more central, but this'll do until they can sell it on, or until they want to rent it out etc. they probably aren't from London, more likely the Home Counties, they're university educated, work hard, play hard, have little to no interest in engaging with the local community, can't see how rising house prices can in any way be a negative thing, because how can it be when it benefits them?
> 
> Do I win £5 ?
> 
> (And while that may sound like every cliche in the book - I actually know people like that, so don't be offended!)



Nice try! And I take your point.

But ... early-mid 40s. Second property lived in. Two kids. Staying put. He born in Lewisham, she Swindon. Fairly engaged locally.

£5 please (Winot knows them well and will vouch for my description!)


----------



## Gramsci (Sep 9, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Shame the powers that be seem to be sticking their heads in the sand about the need for more 1 bedroom flats



I know. Its an interesting document. Its endorsed by the Council.

It also backs up what a lot of people say about affordable smaller flats. 

Its like these docs get written and then "collect dust".


----------



## Chilavert (Sep 10, 2013)

editor said:


> I don't think any of my friends would be "delighted" by a Foxtons opening up in their town. Why would they? Their presence almost always heralds the start of house prices rising.


You've answered your own question there.

Edit: Are people suggesting that these mysterious 'young professionals' are able to afford £500k flats as first time buyers?


----------



## editor (Sep 10, 2013)

Chilavert said:


> You've answered your own question there.


To be honest, I'd have supreme trouble retaining people who are 'delighted' to see house prices soar as friends.


----------



## leanderman (Sep 10, 2013)

editor said:


> To be honest, I'd have supreme trouble retaining people who are 'delighted' to see house prices soar as friends.



I must just be a bad person!


----------



## editor (Sep 10, 2013)

leanderman said:


> I must just be a bad person!


Hey, if you want to hang about with jolly chums who are simply delighted about the prospect of communities being torn apart by house price increases, that's your call.


----------



## Chilavert (Sep 10, 2013)

editor said:


> To be honest, I'd have supreme trouble retaining people who are 'delighted' to see house prices soar as friends.


If people have worked hard to buy a property then they're entitled to take satisfaction if it rises in value in my view.

Each to their own though.

Edit: I fear these views won't go down all that well...


----------



## editor (Sep 10, 2013)

Chilavert said:


> If people have worked hard to buy a property then they're entitled to take satisfaction if it rises in value in my view.


And a lot of people work _even harder _and never manage to get on the property ladder. But being "delighted" that a bunch of cunts like Foxtons are moving into town? Come on...

This whole celebrating house prices thing is insane anyway. Your house might go up in value but so does every other house so unless you intend to sell the thing off and live in a tent it's a meaningless profit, which continues to price out the poorer elements of the community.


----------



## Winot (Sep 10, 2013)

editor said:


> Hey, if you want to hang about with jolly chums who are simply delighted about the prospect of communities being torn apart by house price increases, that's your call.



Bit of a jump there Ed. That's not even what they were reported as saying.


----------



## ffsear (Sep 10, 2013)

Bit silly blaming house price rises on a sole estate agent.    Houses are worth what people are prepared to pay for them,    basic economics.


----------



## innit (Sep 10, 2013)

Foxtons distort markets. Of course they can only do that with the bounds of what people will / can pay, but in London there's no shortage of desperate people who will pay whatever they and their parents can afford to get their first place before prices rise even more.


----------



## ffsear (Sep 10, 2013)

I generally don't believe all the current hype about house prices anyway.  Watch what happens when interest rates go back up,    we'll see a lot more sellers on the market.  Buy to let people will start cashing in!


----------



## editor (Sep 10, 2013)

ffsear said:


> Bit silly blaming house price rises on a sole estate agent.    Houses are worth what people are prepared to pay for them,    basic economics.


It's as much as what Foxtons _represent_ as the impact they have in an area - and the fact that they have form for ripping off tenants and have been taken to court for their dodgy business practices. And it's still going on.


> Tenants have reported being forced to pay more than £500 in various administration fees to secure a privately let home, on top of a month's rent and deposit. Foxtons charges new tenants £420 as an "administration fee", £210 to change a tenant's name on the contract and £96 to renew terms.
> http://www.theguardian.com/money/2013/jul/05/tenants-target-foxtons-branches-fees


----------



## editor (Sep 10, 2013)

ffsear said:


> I generally don't believe all the current hype about house prices anyway.  Watch what happens when interest rates go back up,    we'll see a lot more sellers on the market.  Buy to let people will start cashing in!


I'm sure those struggling to find an affordable place to live will be relieved to hear this.


----------



## ffsear (Sep 10, 2013)

editor said:


> It's as much as what Foxtons _represent_ as the impact they have in an area - and the fact that they have form for ripping off tenants and have been taken to court for their dodgy business practices. And it's still going on.




Yep,  i agree the rental market is a complete fucking joke!


----------



## leanderman (Sep 10, 2013)

editor said:


> Hey, if you want to hang about with jolly chums who are simply delighted about the prospect of communities being torn apart by house price increases, that's your call.



Since I have stated repeatedly here how mad it is to welcome rising house prices - and how such rises hurt owners as well as tenants - I resent the tone of your post, especially the little 'jolly chums' dig.


----------



## editor (Sep 10, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Since I have stated repeatedly here how mad it is to welcome rising house prices - and how such rises hurt owners as well as tenants - I resent the tone of your post, especially the little 'jolly chums' dig.


Are they not (a) your friends (or chums) and (b) "delighted" (or jolly) at the news of Foxtons opening?

That's what you've been repeatedly stating here so I'm not sure how you can be resentful of me simply quoting back what you've said.


----------



## snowy_again (Sep 10, 2013)

Didn't you ban someone yesterday for a similar misinterpretation?


----------



## billythefish (Sep 10, 2013)

editor said:


> Are they not (a) your friends (or chums) and (b) "delighted" (or jolly) at the news of Foxtons opening?
> 
> That's what you've been repeatedly stating here so I'm not sure how you can be resentful of me simply quoting back what you've said.


I'm the only person who thinks like me. Does that mean I should get rid of all my friends who hold different views?


----------



## editor (Sep 10, 2013)

snowy_again said:


> Didn't you ban someone yesterday for a similar misinterpretation?


No I banned someone for continuing, unprovoked, disruptive, cross-thread personal attacks. Looks like you're keen for a bit of disruptive cross thread beef too.

There's a feedback forum if you have a massive problem with a mods decision. Kindly use it rather that dragging a thread off topic. Thanks.


----------



## editor (Sep 10, 2013)

billythefish said:


> I'm the only person who thinks like me. Does that mean I should get rid of all my friends who hold different views?


Nope, haven't said that and haven't even suggested it. I just expressed my personal opinion on the matter, if that's OK with you.


----------



## cuppa tee (Sep 10, 2013)

ffsear said:


> Watch what happens when interest rates go back up,    we'll see a lot more sellers on the market.



True words because all the people who thought it would be a shrewd move to get an interest only mortgage on overvalued property
will find their repayments go through the roof, hence loads of repossessions.


----------



## leanderman (Sep 10, 2013)

cuppa tee said:


> True words because all the people who thought it would be a shrewd move to get an interest only mortgage on overvalued property
> will find their repayments go through the roof, hence loads of repossessions.



Which is a big issue for the Government and the new BoE governor, because rates have to normalise at some point.


----------



## editor (Sep 10, 2013)

Every time the news comes on and some smug dickhead is presenting soaring house process as a great sign for the economy and jolly good news all round, I wish my fist could traverse the medium of digital airwaves.


----------



## cuppa tee (Sep 10, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Which is a big issue for the Government and the new BoE governor, because rates have to normalise at some point.


The thing with interest free is its just a form of renting with benefits so when people do it they are often just waiting for prices to go up so they can cash in and fuck off somewhere leafy
the logical result is that they dont give much of a toss about little things like community or a sustainable local economy, as long as theres a tesco nearby and a good piss up/ top nosh
at the end of the week eveythings cushty.... and as the editor says the goggle box pumps out that rising price are a good thing on a loop guaranteeing that shallow self interest
stays at the front of their minds...... lets face it those at the top of government or the financial markets rarely find themselves living in cardboard boxes once it all goes horribly wrong


----------



## leanderman (Sep 10, 2013)

It will go on until property is properly taxed (capital gains tax, income tax, inheritance tax) 

The only people who can tax it are politicians, who just about all own multiple properties.


----------



## Ol Nick (Sep 10, 2013)

Not really - it will go on until there are as many houses built as people who want to live in them. London used to be a shrinking city. Now it has huge yearly net influxes of people because it is so much better here than in most of the country and indeed world. There are, famously, lots of empty houses in Lancashire. You can change the way the houses are allocated but you're just shuffling the pieces round.

At some point you either believe in unconstrained growth or sustainable human populations globally and locally http://www.populationmatters.org/attenborough-talk/


----------



## leanderman (Sep 10, 2013)

Ol Nick said:


> Not really - it will go on until there are as many houses built as people who want to live in them. London used to be a shrinking city. Now it has huge yearly net influxes of people because it is so much better here than in most of the country and indeed world. There are, famously, lots of empty houses in Lancashire. You can change the way the houses are allocated but you're just shuffling the pieces round.
> 
> At some point you either believe in unconstrained growth or sustainable human populations globally and locally http://www.populationmatters.org/attenborough-talk/



I had grown tired of making that argument on this forum. 

London's population rose 145,000 last year.

But, apparently, that neither puts pressure on school places or pushes up house prices and rents!


----------



## leanderman (Sep 11, 2013)

Yet another flier from Foxtons this morning, in which they claim to have sold 226 Brixton homes since arriving in March.


----------



## pissflaps (Sep 11, 2013)

we got one in WN yesterday, tho it was addressed to the previous owner.

/fistpump
//intheclub


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 11, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Yet another flier from Foxtons this morning, in which they claim to have sold 226 Brixton homes since arriving in March.




I got another envelope from them, but I've no idea what contents are, as I no longer bother opening them


----------



## shakespearegirl (Sep 11, 2013)

I haven't had any since I took one in and told them to stop sending me stuff.. Every other estate agent in Brixton has people ready and waiting to buy or rent my house at least once a week though.


----------



## bosie (Sep 13, 2013)

leanderman said:


> The madness continues: Two bedrooms, 900sq ft: £630,000!
> 
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/29618044?search_identifier=ec1c517d7a4c3a37f54277fa733dfd6f





nagapie said:


> They're chancing it, they'll never get that.



Under offer. It didn't even get reduced on Rightmove. Absolute madness!


----------



## leanderman (Sep 13, 2013)

£691 per sq ft.

My neighbour paid £18 sq ft.


----------



## leanderman (Sep 14, 2013)

Rushcroft Road loading bay


----------



## leanderman (Sep 20, 2013)

As part of its depressingly successful stock market flotation today, Foxtons plans to open 5-10 branches a year in London until 2018.

Also, the company has made its new owners a fortune, following the £390m made by the founder Hunt when he sold out


----------



## cuppa tee (Sep 20, 2013)

I counted no less than six Foxrons signs with "sold" underneath in the space of less than fifty yards on the long red brick building on Coldharbour Lane just before Loughborough Junction. They looked like the architectural version of a nasty rash.


----------



## leanderman (Sep 20, 2013)

and more Elm Park madness. £578 sq ft

http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/30499470?search_identifier=ec1c517d7a4c3a37f54277fa733dfd6f


----------



## CH1 (Sep 21, 2013)

cuppa tee said:


> I counted no less than six Foxrons signs with "sold" underneath in the space of less than fifty yards on the long red brick building on Coldharbour Lane just before Loughborough Junction. They looked like the architectural version of a nasty rash.


There are 4 flats in the recently added faux mansard roof - looks like the developer cashed in already.


----------



## shakespearegirl (Sep 22, 2013)

2 bed house on our street went on for £500k, reportedly sold after going to sealed bids for £578k


----------



## leanderman (Sep 22, 2013)

Some of these people must be taking on crippling, never-ending mortgages.


----------



## Manter (Sep 22, 2013)

shakespearegirl said:


> 2 bed house on our street went on for £500k, reportedly sold after going to sealed bids for £578k


To think we looked at a four bedroom house last year on the market for £550k and told the agent it was overpriced... Brixton has gone completely mad, but has also gone completely mad so quickly! Literally in the last 12 - 18 months. I find it amazing, but what non- Brixtonite friends find amazing is that a zone 2 area on a tube line was insulated from the London property madness for so long.


----------



## shakespearegirl (Sep 22, 2013)

Manter said:


> To think we looked at a four bedroom house last year on the market for £550k and told the agent it was overpriced... Brixton has gone completely mad, but has also gone completely mad so quickly! Literally in the last 12 - 18 months. I find it amazing, but what non- Brixtonite friends find amazing is that a zone 2 area on a tube line was insulated from the London property madness for so long.



When we were buying our house two and a half years ago, similar ones to the one just sold were on the market for £400k.


----------



## leanderman (Sep 22, 2013)

shakespearegirl said:


> When we were buying our house two and a half years ago, similar ones to the one just sold were on the market for £400k.



It's inexplicable. But, according to many reports, similar rises are being seen across many parts of London.


----------



## gaijingirl (Sep 22, 2013)

I posted this on the W. Norwood thread.. but I'm so flabbergasted I have to post it here, since it's Foxtons madness afaic!

http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/17425760?search_identifier=884b01720b471b9983fb5051e67a8d97


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Sep 22, 2013)

gaijingirl said:


> I posted this on the W. Norwood thread.. but I'm so flabbergasted I have to post it here, since it's Foxtons madness afaic!
> 
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/17425760?search_identifier=884b01720b471b9983fb5051e67a8d97



The flat is above the Payless shop.


----------



## gaijingirl (Sep 22, 2013)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> The flat is above the Payless shop.



 so ironic!


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 22, 2013)

bosie said:


> Under offer. It didn't even get reduced on Rightmove. Absolute madness!



FFS.  That road has changed so much in the last 10 years


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 22, 2013)

leanderman said:


> and more Elm Park madness. £578 sq ft
> 
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/30499470?search_identifier=ec1c517d7a4c3a37f54277fa733dfd6f



That's mental!  Been watching that being done up over the past few months and wondering how much it would go for.  Now I know.  Can't wait to tell my neighbour!


----------



## Manter (Sep 22, 2013)

gaijingirl said:


> I posted this on the W. Norwood thread.. but I'm so flabbergasted I have to post it here, since it's Foxtons madness afaic!
> 
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/17425760?search_identifier=884b01720b471b9983fb5051e67a8d97


Is that an outside door into a bathroom? Irrelevant to the point I know, but v odd...


----------



## Manter (Sep 22, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> That's mental!  Been watching that being done up over the past few months and wondering how much it would go for.  Now I know.  Can't wait to tell my neighbour!


It's beautifully done, but god it's small for the price....


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 22, 2013)

Manter said:


> It's beautifully done, but god it's small for the price....



My sister's just put her house on the market (3 bedrooms), and she has a garage, conservatory and large storage shed.  Hers isn't on for even half of that, but then she's not in Brixton.  She used to live in Elm Park though.  I've just emailed her showing her that property and told her she shouldn't have moved so soon


----------



## fortyplus (Sep 22, 2013)

leanderman said:


> As part of its depressingly successful stock market flotation today, Foxtons plans to open 5-10 branches a year in London until 2018.
> 
> Also, the company has made its new owners a fortune, following the £390m made by the founder Hunt when he sold out


and now institutional investors (that is, our pension funds) have gone in at the top of the market and bought something that will very likely go titsup when this stupid property bubble bursts. same old same old.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 24, 2013)

leanderman said:


> and more Elm Park madness. £578 sq ft
> 
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/30499470?search_identifier=ec1c517d7a4c3a37f54277fa733dfd6f



I took a look at that one today on passing.  It's practically opposite the £630k one, and they're both Haart.  Seems like Haart are as bad as Fuckston's in overpricing property


----------



## Rushy (Sep 24, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I took a look at that one today on passing.  It's practically opposite the £630k one, and they're both Haart.  Seems like Haart are as bad as Fuckston's in overpricing property


I guess they have to be, otherwise the don't get the instructions.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Sep 24, 2013)

Rushy said:


> I guess they have to be, otherwise the don't get the instructions.


 
Lets be honest all of them are working on the basis of getting the most they can. It's only 'overpriced' as far as they're concerned if they don't sell it (and then only really if the seller takes their business elsewhere). If Foxtons price a bit higher it's not because the others are nicer somehow.


----------



## Rushy (Sep 24, 2013)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Lets be honest all of them are working on the basis of getting the most they can. It's only 'overpriced' as far as they're concerned if they don't sell it (and then only really if the seller takes their business elsewhere). If Foxtons price a bit higher it's not because the others are nicer somehow.


True. The smaller agents don't have the clout to push the market up as Foxtons have done but they are happy to hang on the coat tails.

Let's not forget the complicity of owners - if you are enraged about house prices and you are an owner, you can always sell it for under asking price. Personally, I would need a pretty good reason not to sell to the highest bidder.


----------



## Frumious B. (Sep 24, 2013)

Haart's cars are even more obnoxious than Foxtons' - Audis with racing stripes FFS.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 24, 2013)

I reckon there'll be no houses with net curtains left in Elm Park soon.  I tried to look through the edges of the frosting on the £800k house today.   Wonder what will replace frost on a roll when it goes out of fashion


----------



## Rushy (Sep 24, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I reckon there'll be no houses with net curtains left in Elm Park soon.  I tried to look through the edges of the frosting on the £800k house today.   Wonder what will replace frost on a roll when it goes out of fashion


I reckon nets may be due a come back


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 24, 2013)

Rushy said:


> I reckon nets may be due a come back



*starts digging old nets out*


----------



## Boudicca (Sep 24, 2013)

Mine are 'voile', not nets


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 24, 2013)

Boudicca said:


> Mine are 'voile', not nets



Oh, I have some of those as well


----------



## leanderman (Sep 24, 2013)

Rushy said:


> I reckon nets may be due a come back



unlikely: window film lasts forever, is dead cheap and requires no maintenance.


----------



## Manter (Sep 24, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I reckon there'll be no houses with net curtains left in Elm Park soon.  I tried to look through the edges of the frosting on the £800k house today.   Wonder what will replace frost on a roll when it goes out of fashion


shutters


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 24, 2013)

Manter said:


> shutters



There's quite a few shutters in Elm Park, but they never seemed to catch on the same way frost on a roll did, I'd imagine due to cost.

Come to think of it, can't seem to remember seeing any bars on windows nowadays.  There used to be a few houses with bars.  Why would you want to live in something that looked like you were imprisoned


----------



## Manter (Sep 24, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> There's quite a few shutters in Elm Park, but they never seemed to catch on the same way frost on a roll did, I'd imagine due to cost.
> 
> Come to think of it, can't seem to remember seeing any bars on windows nowadays.  There used to be a few houses with bars.  Why would you want to live in something that looked like you were imprisoned


they are much more expensive.  I imagine they'll be wave 2 gentrification...window film is more taste than money* 

I guess if the alternative is endlessly replacing your stereo they start to look more attractive, but they do look dreadful.  Make an area feel unsafe too, IYSWIM- bit of a self fulfilling prophecy.  There were loads of bars on windows and doors in the bit of leeds I lived in when I was up there, and it was all a bit depressing

*I actually like shutters.  And my major objection to net curtains (I think we've discussed this before?) is that many of them aren't clean.  Like the ones in the house opposite mine, that are dark grey, with a very suspicious brown stain on one.  Ugh


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 24, 2013)

Manter said:


> they are much more expensive.  I imagine they'll be wave 2 gentrification...window film is more taste than money*
> 
> I guess if the alternative is endlessly replacing your stereo they start to look more attractive, but they do look dreadful.  Make an area feel unsafe too, IYSWIM- bit of a self fulfilling prophecy.  There were loads of bars on windows and doors in the bit of leeds I lived in when I was up there, and it was all a bit depressing
> 
> *I actually like shutters.  And my major objection to net curtains (I think we've discussed this before?) is that many of them aren't clean.  Like the ones in the house opposite mine, that are dark grey, with a very suspicious brown stain on one.  Ugh



Some people have bay windows though, and they can be draughty, so if you can't afford to have heating on all the time, curtains are probably best, but then if you have a shitty curtain track and can't pull the curtains, a bit of a waste of time having frost if curtains are shut most of the time


----------



## Rushy (Sep 24, 2013)

Manter said:


> they are much more expensive.  I imagine they'll be wave 2 gentrification...window film is more taste than money*


I have the original shutters in my place - including some very unusual sliding sash shutters. Which I rebuilt, presumably not very well as they are currently jammed at about 10% shut.

Plantation shutters are the one to look out for. They look lovely IMO but rather expensive.


----------



## Manter (Sep 24, 2013)

Rushy said:


> I have the original shutters in my place - including some very unusual sliding sash shutters. Which I rebuilt, presumably not very well as they are currently jammed at about 10% shut.
> 
> Plantation shutters are the one to look out for. They look lovely IMO but rather expensive.


my best mate had victorian floor to ceiling shutters in her old house, and they seemed to need rebuilding every 18 months or so, so you're not alone.  I'm v jealous....


----------



## gaijingirl (Sep 24, 2013)

We have plantation shutters (on bay windows) and they _were_ expensive, but I absolutely love them - not least because we're on a fairly busy road as we're close to lots of transport so it keeps our privacy a bit - and also because we get strong sun in, so we can still have some light without being blinded.


----------



## Manter (Sep 24, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Some people have bay windows though, and they can be draughty, so if you can't afford to have heating on all the time, curtains are probably best, but then if you have a shitty curtain track and can't pull the curtains, a bit of a waste of time having frost if curtains are shut most of the time


we have bays with curved radiators underneath them, so plantation shutters were the only things that offered privacy, adjustable light, but don't block the radiators.  that's how I explained the cost to the Northerner, anyway   I also love them....


----------



## Dan U (Sep 24, 2013)

We've got practically floor to ceiling shutters in our front room and one of them works nearly perfectly and is lovely. The other one doesn't shut properly as some previous chump who rented this place has installed loads of those little clips that attach cables to skirting boards on the skirting board at the bottom. 

Whole thing needs to come out but it's not our place and doubt the landlord will do it unless the windows are about to fall out. 

They are lovely things though, I love Georgian houses though generally.


----------



## Rushy (Sep 24, 2013)

Manter said:


> my best mate had victorian floor to ceiling shutters in her old house, and they seemed to need rebuilding every 18 months or so, so you're not alone.  I'm v jealous....


George IV ackshually . And they are still solid. 

The sliding ones had been removed and just the boxes remained - hence the rebuild. I think the weights have gotten stuck. It's on the list...


----------



## Manter (Sep 24, 2013)

Rushy said:


> George IV ackshually . And they are still solid.
> 
> The sliding ones had been removed and just the boxes remained - hence the rebuild. I think the weights have gotten stuck. It's on the list...


Is your list like my list? A zillion items long and growing?!


----------



## leanderman (Sep 24, 2013)

Manter said:


> shutters



Cost a fortune, need to be cleaned etc etc. Madness


----------



## Manter (Sep 24, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Cost a fortune, need to be cleaned etc etc. Madness




Gaijingirl and I like them....


----------



## Frumious B. (Sep 24, 2013)

What's happening to this Foxtons hate thread? Seems to have been taken over by Sarah Beeny.


----------



## Rushy (Sep 24, 2013)

Manter said:


> Is your list like my list? A zillion items long and growing?!


My list appears to be written on a mobius strip.


----------



## quimcunx (Sep 24, 2013)

I like shutters but I make do with nets voile.


----------



## quimcunx (Sep 24, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Cost a fortune, need to be cleaned etc etc. Madness



blinds.  Blinds need to be cleaned but cannot be cleaned properly.  I don't understand why people like them, except for fashion.


----------



## leanderman (Sep 24, 2013)

Manter said:


> Gaijingirl and I like them....



Then I can't help you!


----------



## leanderman (Sep 24, 2013)

quimcunx said:


> blinds.  Blinds need to be cleaned but cannot be cleaned properly.  I don't understand why people like them, except for fashion.



surely shutters gather dust?


----------



## quimcunx (Sep 24, 2013)

leanderman said:


> surely shutters gather dust?



I'm sure they do.  But so do blinds and everyfucker has them.   Nets voile is easy to clean.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 24, 2013)

What's wrong with normal curtains?


----------



## Belushi (Sep 24, 2013)

I don't have anything covering my windows, I'm breaking all the rules.


----------



## leanderman (Sep 24, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> What's wrong with normal curtains?



Nothing. As long as you have film as well.

Otherwise you may have no privacy when the curtains are open.

Our curtains definitely make it warmer - or at least feel such


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 24, 2013)

Just don't open the curtains! I never do unless I have the window open.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 24, 2013)

I don't really understand what this film thing is


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 24, 2013)

If you're worried about privacy and are weird and like having the curtains open, just close the curtains when you're naked. job done


----------



## Winot (Sep 24, 2013)

We have shutters and net curtains!

*not on the same windows

**modern net curtains I'll have you know, not the Ena Sharples twitching kind


----------



## quimcunx (Sep 24, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> What's wrong with normal curtains?



They're not that good at letting the light in.   I never shut my curtains.  Apart from the voile ones in front of the voile ones in the bedroom.  Or if I'm doing the wii fit in the living room in my pants.  ie I never shut them.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 24, 2013)

Yeah, I'm not that fussed about privacy.
I spent the indoor bits of my summer in my pants on the sofa with the patio doors wide open, in full view of the community hall across the courtyard


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 24, 2013)

quimcunx said:


> They're not that good at letting the light in.   I never shut my curtains.  Apart from the voile ones in front of the voile ones in the bedroom.  Or if I'm doing the wii fit in the living room in my pants.  ie I never shut them.


Haven't you got any indoor lights?


----------



## quimcunx (Sep 24, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> Haven't you got any indoor lights?



They are already in.  They also cost money and the environment, OU.  I'm disappointed in you.  Also I always have my windows open so even by your weirdy weird rules I'm correct.


----------



## Manter (Sep 24, 2013)

leanderman said:


> surely shutters gather dust?


The thing with shutters (and wooden/tiled floors) is that yes, they get dusty. Bit they are quick and easy to clean, and always make me think that curtains, carpets etc are just as dusty, but you can't see it. So they are probably less pleasant in the long term...


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 24, 2013)

Frumious B. said:


> What's happening to this Foxtons hate thread? Seems to have been taken over by Sarah Beeny.



People who buy from Foxton's have either frosted glass or shutters, so it's relevant


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 24, 2013)

I've noticed the trend for browny or greeny/greyey looking doors on these expensive properties as well


----------



## Rushy (Sep 24, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I've noticed the trend for browny or greeny/greyey looking doors on these expensive properties as well


Downpipe.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 24, 2013)

Matt looking as well.  None of this commoner glossy look


----------



## ash (Sep 24, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I've noticed the trend for browny or greeny/greyey looking doors on these expensive properties as well


Or a very pale blue- very farrow and ball


----------



## leanderman (Sep 24, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I've noticed the trend for browny or greeny/greyey looking doors on these expensive properties as well



yep. true. sticking to classic glossy pillar box red


----------



## ash (Sep 25, 2013)

leanderman said:


> yep. true. sticking to classic glossy pillar box red


Or a Dickensian glossy black


----------



## nagapie (Sep 25, 2013)

We still have the last occupant's dirty, torn net curtains from the 60s We have had 'renovating' issues since we moved in nearly 3 years ago and Manter won't come help us.


----------



## shakespearegirl (Sep 25, 2013)

Window film - yep 
Shutters - on order
Greyish Farrow and Ball front door - about to be painted

Oh no, what have I become


----------



## Manter (Sep 25, 2013)

nagapie said:


> We still have the last occupant's dirty, torn net curtains from the 60s We have had 'renovating' issues since we moved in nearly 3 years ago and Manter won't come help us.


I've been busy


----------



## Manter (Sep 25, 2013)

leanderman said:


> yep. true. sticking to classic glossy pillar box red


One if our neighbours has just painted their door pillar box red. And their railings. And gate. And drainpipe. And lead flashings. And wheely bin


----------



## leanderman (Sep 25, 2013)

Manter said:


> One if our neighbours has just painted their door pillar box red. And their railings. And gate. And drainpipe. And lead flashings. And wheely bin



Ouch. That is not classic.


----------



## leanderman (Sep 25, 2013)

shakespearegirl said:


> Window film - yep
> Shutters - on order
> Greyish Farrow and Ball front door - about to be painted
> 
> Oh no, what have I become



Why shutters and film? Me no understand. In effect, they do the same thing - or is it an aesthetic thing?


----------



## mao (Sep 25, 2013)

shakespearegirl said:


> Greyish Farrow and Ball front door - about to be painted



Thanks for the tip. I actually like Farrow and Ball!


----------



## nagapie (Sep 25, 2013)

Manter said:


> I've been busy



Excuses excuses. I thought you were more the push it out in a field and go straight back to work sort of woman.


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Sep 25, 2013)

When I was young, it seemed that life was so wonderful,
A miracle, oh it was beautiful, magical.
And all the birds in the trees, well they'd be singing so happily,
Joyfully, playfully watching me.
But then they send me away to teach me how to be sensible,
Logical, responsible, practical.
And they showed me a world where I could be so dependable,
Clinical, intellectual, cynical.

There are times when all the world's asleep,
The questions run too deep
For such a simple man.
Won't you please, please tell me what we've learned
I know it sounds absurd
But please tell me who I am.

Now watch what you say or they'll be calling you a radical,
Liberal, fanatical, criminal.
Won't you sign up your name, we'd like to feel you're
Acceptable, respectable, presentable, a vegetable!

At night, when all the world's asleep,
The questions run so deep
For such a simple man.
Won't you please, please tell me what we've learned
I know it sounds absurd
But please tell me who I am.


----------



## Boudicca (Sep 25, 2013)

We are trying to turn our 30's street into Chelsea by painting them in pastel colours instead of brick red. I have been told by Dulux that they do not do lilac masonry paint as they cannot guarantee it won't fade.  This has not deterred me as my brother-in-law runs a paint factory and I have put in a special request.


----------



## shakespearegirl (Sep 25, 2013)

mao said:


> Thanks for the tip. I actually like Farrow and Ball!


Lamp room grey is the biz


----------



## shakespearegirl (Sep 25, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Why shutters and film? Me no understand. In effect, they do the same thing - or is it an aesthetic thing?



We couldn't afford shutters when we moved in, so have film on the bottom half of the front room window. Will keep it once we have shutters so we can have them open for the light but still have privacy


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 25, 2013)

Manter said:


> One if our neighbours has just painted their door pillar box red. And their railings. And gate. And drainpipe. And lead flashings. And wheely bin





That sounds horrendous.

You should stick a picture up


----------



## Rushy (Sep 25, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Why shutters and film? Me no understand. In effect, they do the same thing - or is it an aesthetic thing?


 Traditional shutters block light. Obscured glass gives privacy when they're open.


----------



## Rushy (Sep 25, 2013)

Manter said:


> One if our neighbours has just painted their door pillar box red. And their railings. And gate. And drainpipe. And lead flashings. And wheely bin


...And he painted a couple on the corner of the street who were havin a snog.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 25, 2013)

shakespearegirl said:


> Window film - yep
> Shutters - on order
> Greyish Farrow and Ball front door - about to be painted



I had no idea who they were until this thread.  They have a colour called Elephant's Breath


----------



## Rushy (Sep 25, 2013)

On account of the smell.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 25, 2013)

Vert de Terre

Is this your colour Shakespeare?

http://www.farrow-ball.com/vert-de-terre/colours//fcp-product/100234


----------



## leanderman (Sep 25, 2013)

Boudicca said:


> We are trying to turn our 30's street into Chelsea by painting them in pastel colours instead of brick red. I have been told by Dulux that they do not do lilac masonry paint as they cannot guarantee it won't fade.  This has not deterred me as my brother-in-law runs a paint factory and I have put in a special request.



Nice plan.


----------



## leanderman (Sep 25, 2013)

Rushy said:


> Traditional shutters block light. Obscured glass gives privacy when they're open.



I'm standing by curtains and film.


----------



## Manter (Sep 25, 2013)

nagapie said:


> Excuses excuses. I thought you were more the push it out in a field and go straight back to work sort of woman.


The pushing was fine... The going back to work is more complicated with a small thing that won't even let you put him down....


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 25, 2013)

Manter said:


> The pushing was fine... The going back to work is more complicated with a small thing that won't even let you put him down....


oh are you a mother now?!  congratulations


----------



## nagapie (Sep 25, 2013)

Manter said:


> The pushing was fine... The going back to work is more complicated with a small thing that won't even let you put him down....



Wear him on your back like in Africa. Just joking of course, I must warn you that once I had one I never ever wanted to go back to work ever again.

Now that I am crisis free, I'd like to come round to see the baby. Let me know if that's allowed.


----------



## Winot (Sep 25, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Vert de Terre
> 
> Is this your colour Shakespeare?
> 
> http://www.farrow-ball.com/vert-de-terre/colours//fcp-product/100234



Our stairwell.


----------



## Manter (Sep 25, 2013)

nagapie said:


> Wear him on your back like in Africa. Just joking of course, I must warn you that once I had one I never ever wanted to go back to work ever again.
> 
> Now that I am crisis free, I'd like to come round to see the baby. Let me know if that's allowed.


Yes  will pm you later


----------



## Manter (Sep 25, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Vert de Terre
> 
> Is this your colour Shakespeare?
> 
> http://www.farrow-ball.com/vert-de-terre/colours//fcp-product/100234


Think our front door may be that colour... I didn't paint it so don't know!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2013)

Manter said:


> they are much more expensive.  I imagine they'll be wave 2 gentrification...window film is more taste than money*
> 
> I guess if the alternative is endlessly replacing your stereo they start to look more attractive, but they do look dreadful.  Make an area feel unsafe too, IYSWIM- bit of a self fulfilling prophecy.  There were loads of bars on windows and doors in the bit of leeds I lived in when I was up there, and it was all a bit depressing
> 
> *I actually like shutters.  And my major objection to net curtains (I think we've discussed this before?) is that many of them aren't clean.  Like the ones in the house opposite mine, that are dark grey, with a very suspicious brown stain on one.  Ugh



Ah, the brown stain, where the myth of the bloke wiping his cock on the curtains probably came from.


----------



## Manter (Sep 25, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Ah, the brown stain, where the myth of the bloke wiping his cock on the curtains probably came from.


Eyw! I was thinking blood, now I'll never be able to look out of my front window again!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2013)

Manter said:


> Eyw! I was thinking blood, now I'll never be able to look out of my front window again!



 Sorry!


----------



## leanderman (Sep 25, 2013)

Given that Dulux etc do a huge range of colours, can Farrow and Ball be worth the extra expense? Does it last longer or something?


----------



## snowy_again (Sep 25, 2013)

No, but Dulux colour match easily copies F&B paint.


----------



## Rushy (Sep 25, 2013)

quimcunx Glad someone got the reference!


----------



## Manter (Sep 25, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Given that Dulux etc do a huge range of colours, can Farrow and Ball be worth the extra expense? Does it last longer or something?


It supposedly has a different finish- a Matt chalky finish that isn't available in cheaper paints. And there is the whole heritage formulations, low toxicity thing- they don't have plastics in them for example and are safe to use on toys etc. Plus all made in Dorset, British company, British manufacturing. 

Like many premium ranges its mostly, IMO, about providing reassurance that they are doing something 'tasteful' for people who aren't naturally creative or lack confidence in their own taste. But no harm in it, I generally like people buying things from British craftsman brands not global conglomerates


----------



## Rushy (Sep 25, 2013)

Manter said:


> It supposedly has a different finish- a Matt chalky finish that isn't available in cheaper paints. And there is the whole heritage formulations, low toxicity thing- they don't have plastics in them for example and are safe to use on toys etc. Plus all made in Dorset, British company, British manufacturing.
> 
> Like many premium ranges its mostly, IMO, about providing reassurance that they are doing something 'tasteful' for people who aren't naturally creative or lack confidence in their own taste. But no harm in it, I generally like people buying things from British craftsman brands not global conglomerates


I think the finish is nicer. It does have a  thick matt chalky depth to it. That said, it is one of those things that I might only notice if I stopped and compared the two side by side and for that reason I stick to more standard paints.


----------



## Winot (Sep 25, 2013)

Farrow & Ball is reassuringly expensive.


----------



## Rushy (Sep 25, 2013)

Winot said:


> Farrow & Ball is reassuringly expensive.


Like Foxtons.

Wehey! Back on the tracks...


----------



## Manter (Sep 25, 2013)

It was disappointingly non-surreal derail.  Must do better


----------



## shakespearegirl (Sep 25, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Vert de Terre
> 
> Is this your colour Shakespeare?
> 
> http://www.farrow-ball.com/vert-de-terre/colours//fcp-product/100234



No this is ours

http://www.farrow-ball.com/lamp-room-gray/colours//fcp-product/100088

We use Farrow and Ball as Mr Shakes is increadibly sensitive to chemicals. We'd have to move out and not come back for weeks after it was painted if we used normal paint


----------



## Rushy (Sep 25, 2013)

Manter said:


> It was disappointingly non-surreal derail.  Must do better


I disagree. I think veering from the Fuck Foxtons thread into comparing net curtains and shades of Farrow & Ball is quite surreal!


----------



## Manter (Sep 25, 2013)

Rushy said:


> I disagree. I think veering from the Fuck Foxtons thread into comparing net curtains and shades of Farrow & Ball is quite surreal!


all property.... we can do better!


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 25, 2013)

shakespearegirl said:


> No this is ours
> 
> http://www.farrow-ball.com/lamp-room-gray/colours//fcp-product/100088
> 
> We use Farrow and Ball as Mr Shakes is increadibly sensitive to chemicals. We'd have to move out and not come back for weeks after it was painted if we used normal paint



Grey is nice, but I also like the greeny olivey grey colour.  Funnily enough, I was in Homebase today and found myself looking at paint, and whilst standing there thinking it was well expensive.  Then I realised I was looking at Farrow & Ball stuff!  £35 for a 5 litre tin I think it was


----------



## Frumious B. (Sep 25, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Funnily enough, I was in Homebase today


0 out of 10 . Unless you were buying materials for the crucifixion of estate agents.


----------



## Manter (Sep 25, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Grey is nice, but I also like the greeny olivey grey colour.  Funnily enough, I was in Homebase today and found myself looking at paint, and whilst standing there thinking it was well expensive.  Then I realised I was looking at Farrow & Ball stuff!  £35 for a 5 litre tin I think it was


in their defence, making paint without chemical 'shortcuts' is a labour intensive process, their materials are expensive (resins etc) plus british manufacturing is much more expensive than high volume manufacturing in low cost locations as used by their competitors.  Also, IME, some of the premium paints take fewer coats- cheap white paint is the ultimate false economy...


----------



## Rushy (Sep 25, 2013)

Manter said:


> in their defence, making paint without chemical 'shortcuts' is a labour intensive process, their materials are expensive (resins etc) plus british manufacturing is much more expensive than high volume manufacturing in low cost locations as used by their competitors.  Also, IME, some of the premium paints take fewer coats- cheap white paint is the ultimate false economy...


Yes. And getting a cheaper estate agent is also a false economy...

Bloody hell. You guys are hard to control!


----------



## shakespearegirl (Sep 25, 2013)

I was unconvinced when Mr Shakes insisted using Farrow and Ball but having painted the house when we first moved in I was really surprised at how much less stinky it was than normal paint and it does need fewer coats. 

The paint lasts really well and we are only having it re-painted as I did such a bad job and now we've had the bathroom done it the rest of the house looks shabby. I put my foot down and we are getting it done professionally this time. 

My argument was helped by the fact that Mr Shakes still hasn't done the bits I can't reach and I finished it 2.5 years ago!


----------



## pissflaps (Sep 25, 2013)

vote for most middle class thread on here?

far duller than the tapas one from last week.


----------



## Manter (Sep 25, 2013)

Rushy said:


> Yes. And getting a cheaper estate agent is also a false economy...
> 
> Bloody hell. You guys are hard to control!


I have NEVER used Foxtons!  <<spits>>

I once gave them my phone number as I wanted to look at a house they had for sale and they then called me daily for three weeks trying to get me to look at stuff that was the wrong spec, for the wrong price, in the wrong area.  They are a nightmare.

*The house I wanted to look at went under offer, which they didn't tell me until I was in their car- they took me to see something else, it was wildly overpriced, the agent tried to give me a patronising little lecture on housing economics (which was incorrect in both generality and specifics), gave me dangerously incompetent advice on what building work it needed (but what would I know, I'm just a little woman right?) and offered me sight of a survey paid for by a previous attempted purchaser, which is against their code of conduct


----------



## Manter (Sep 25, 2013)

pissflaps said:


> vote for most middle class thread on here?
> 
> far duller than the tapas one from last week.


tapas would be a good segue.  Suitably surreal


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 25, 2013)

Frumious B. said:


> 0 out of 10 . Unless you were buying materials for the crucifixion of estate agents.



I'm going to B&Q on Sunday as well

Oh, by the way, I picked up a Farrow and Ball paint chart.  It's very pretty


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 25, 2013)

shakespearegirl said:


> I was unconvinced when Mr Shakes insisted using Farrow and Ball but having painted the house when we first moved in I was really surprised at how much less stinky it was than normal paint and it does need fewer coats.
> 
> The paint lasts really well and we are only having it re-painted as I did such a bad job and now we've had the bathroom done it the rest of the house looks shabby. I put my foot down and we are getting it done professionally this time.
> 
> My argument was helped by the fact that Mr Shakes still hasn't done the bits I can't reach and I finished it 2.5 years ago!



If you're going to use expensive paint, then you can't afford to waste it, and should therefore get yourself someone who knows what they're doing!


----------



## Rushy (Sep 25, 2013)

Manter said:


> I have NEVER used Foxtons!  <<spits>>
> 
> I once gave them my phone number as I wanted to look at a house they had for sale and they then called me daily for three weeks trying to get me to look at stuff that was the wrong spec, for the wrong price, in the wrong area.  They are a nightmare.
> 
> *The house I wanted to look at went under offer, which they didn't tell me until I was in their car- they took me to see something else, it was wildly overpriced, the agent tried to give me a patronising little lecture on housing economics (which was incorrect in both generality and specifics), gave me dangerously incompetent advice on what building work it needed (but what would I know, I'm just a little woman right?) and offered me sight of a survey paid for by a previous attempted purchaser, which is against their code of conduct


That's more like it!


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 25, 2013)

I got THREE envelopes from them today, after only getting TWO on Saturday.

*spits on Fuckstons*


----------



## shakespearegirl (Sep 25, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> If you're going to use expensive paint, then you can't afford to waste it, and should therefore get yourself someone who knows what they're doing!



I totally agree Minnie. DIY is not one of my strengths.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 25, 2013)

shakespearegirl said:


> I totally agree Minnie. DIY is not one of my strengths.



See, if you'd asked me, I'd have put you on to a brilliant decorator


----------



## Winot (Sep 25, 2013)

Manter said:


> tapas would be a good segue.  Suitably surreal


 
I can imagine them doing a green called Padrón Pepper.


----------



## leanderman (Sep 25, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> See, if you'd asked me, I'd have put you on to a brilliant decorator



Nothing entertains me more in a recession than people moaning about money - while still having cleaners and decorators.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 25, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Nothing entertains me more in a recession than people moaning about money - while still having cleaners and decorators.



Who's moaning?


----------



## leanderman (Sep 25, 2013)

shakespearegirl said:


> I was unconvinced when Mr Shakes insisted using Farrow and Ball but having painted the house when we first moved in I was really surprised at how much less stinky it was than normal paint and it does need fewer coats.
> 
> The paint lasts really well and we are only having it re-painted as I did such a bad job and now we've had the bathroom done it the rest of the house looks shabby. I put my foot down and we are getting it done professionally this time.
> 
> My argument was helped by the fact that Mr Shakes still hasn't done the bits I can't reach and I finished it 2.5 years ago!




Maybe. Our downstairs is mainly Farrow and Ball but I'm going to repaint in Dulux pure brilliant white. 

Hugely cheaper. Something like a quarter of the cost last time I checked.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 25, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Maybe. Our downstairs is mainly Farrow and Ball but I'm going to repaint in Dulux pure brilliant white.
> 
> Hugely cheaper. Something like a quarter of the cost last time I checked.



I'd be careful of Dulux pure whites.  There was a thing on Watchdog about the pure whites turning yellow in no time.  Can't remember if it was a bad batch or whether it applied to all of a particular type, or whether the problem's been rectified, but I'd look it up if I were you


----------



## leanderman (Sep 25, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Who's moaning?



I didn't mean you!


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 25, 2013)

leanderman said:


> I didn't mean you!



I should think not!  I didn't see shakespearegirl moaning either, so wasn't sure who you were talking about


----------



## shakespearegirl (Sep 25, 2013)

I'm not moaning! I'm thrilled to have a decorator this time.


----------



## leanderman (Sep 25, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I should think not!  I didn't see shakespearegirl moaning either, so wasn't sure who you were talking about



I meant no one on these boards. Just a general observation.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 25, 2013)

Here you go leanderman

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/watchdog/2012/03/dulux.html

Looks like it's only gloss and satin

btw, it happened to the doors I painted.  They're now more of a cream colour


----------



## Manter (Sep 25, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Maybe. Our downstairs is mainly Farrow and Ball but I'm going to repaint in Dulux pure brilliant white.
> 
> Hugely cheaper. Something like a quarter of the cost last time I checked.


but then you'll have a bright white house...??


----------



## leanderman (Sep 25, 2013)

Manter said:


> but then you'll have a bright white house...??



Had always thought this was too clinical and cold. But, where I've seen it done, it works well.


----------



## leanderman (Sep 25, 2013)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Here you go leanderman
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/watchdog/2012/03/dulux.html
> 
> ...



Good spot. Thanks.


----------



## Manter (Sep 25, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Had always thought this was too clinical and cold. But, where I've seen it done, it works well.


I did it in the last place, but it was 1960s and the architectural white box thing suited it.  Seems a bit hard for an old house like yours...


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 25, 2013)

Manter said:


> One if our neighbours has just painted their door pillar box red. And their railings. And gate. And drainpipe. And lead flashings. And wheely bin


That sounds ace - brightens up the street


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2013)

Manter said:


> It supposedly has a different finish- a Matt chalky finish that isn't available in cheaper paints. And there is the whole heritage formulations, low toxicity thing- they don't have plastics in them for example and are safe to use on toys etc. Plus all made in Dorset, British company, British manufacturing.
> 
> Like many premium ranges its mostly, IMO, about providing reassurance that they are doing something 'tasteful' for people who aren't naturally creative or lack confidence in their own taste. But no harm in it, I generally like people buying things from British craftsman brands not global conglomerates



Their paints don't contain solvent-based drying agents, either, so you don't get the pervasive odour that you do with basic emulsions.  Handy if you're sensitive to such things.


----------



## sparkybird (Oct 4, 2013)

In other bonkers news...

Apparently this is under offer within days at over the asking price.....

http://www.foxtons.co.uk/property-for-sale-in-brixton-hill/chpk0309263


----------



## snowy_again (Oct 4, 2013)

I saw the £1.4m Dalberg Road one has a Sale sign on it too. Bizarre.


----------



## Rushy (Oct 4, 2013)

snowy_again said:


> I saw the £1.4m Dalberg Road one has a Sale sign on it too. Bizarre.


Is that the £1.1million place?
Bizarre, even so.


----------



## leanderman (Oct 4, 2013)

I don't understand how people can afford these prices, in terms of salary multiples, if nothing else.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Oct 4, 2013)

I might start trolling the estate agents....

...all ideas gratefully received


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Oct 4, 2013)

My original idea was to ring up all the estate agents and say I own a load of old victorian houses in Brixton that I'm _desperate _to get rid of quickly (cashflow problems) and give them a load of appointment times and addresses all over the borough........then go down the pub, sit back and enjoy.


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Oct 4, 2013)

Westgate Court, a crumbling block of flats adjacent to The Canterbury Arms. I have to ask why they (Lambeth Council) are vandalising the interiors of tenants flats with their "improvements" while they allow the much needed external works to go undone? Is it the leaseholders that have exercised their "Right To Buy" that block/delay the work so they escape financial penalty before they sell up? Or is it incompetence on the part of Lambeth Council that the external work escapes the attention of all contractors?  Or is something a bit dodgy going on?
A few years ago a one bedroom flat in this block went for £120,000. (You can discount the £160,000 previous best , that was a result of mortgage fraud and the one that went for £160,000 (subsequently repossessed) then sold for the new mark of £120,000.)
Now one of the flats in this block is under offer at £230,000. (Foxtons wanted to market it at £250,000 but that was laughed at as too much, bait if you will to the seller, especially given the limited terms contract offered between the estate agent and the seller regarding fees. Their valuation and zero fee offer was regarded as an unrealistic inducement to attract new custom.)
Seller went with another estate agent that has an outlet on the main drag, just a few doors down.
You can do your own checks on property prices.

Recently, a young couple moved into the block , they pay just short of £1,000 per month (Council rent approx £500 per month) to a leaseholder that bought the flat less than a year ago and has fucked off somewhere else (on a lie) because they know it is profitable to buy to let. (Mortgage approx £250 per month)
That young couple are newcomers, they are victims of the leaseholder and the agent they rent the flat from. They might also look at those like me on housing benefit and think i am the problem.

Do you ever get the feeling you are being fucked over?


----------



## snowy_again (Oct 4, 2013)

There's an Economist article today citing the polarisation of Islington as the chattering classes get priced out, leaving them with no option other than to bite the bullet and move south.


----------



## Manter (Oct 5, 2013)

snowy_again said:


> There's an Economist article today citing the polarisation of Islington as the chattering classes get priced out, leaving them with no option other than to bite the bullet and move south.


there was an article in the guardian about notting hill saying its going the way of chelsea and the chattering classes are priced out.  The north london media set are obviously feeling vulnerable


----------



## leanderman (Oct 5, 2013)

Manter said:


> there was an article in the guardian about notting hill saying its going the way of chelsea and the chattering classes are priced out.  The north london media set are obviously feeling vulnerable



It was a fascinating piece. London is changing bewilderingly fast.


----------



## oryx (Oct 5, 2013)

snowy_again said:


> There's an Economist article today citing the polarisation of Islington as the chattering classes get priced out, leaving them with no option other than to bite the bullet and move south.


 
Gentrifiers reap what they sow. I give it five years before the chattering classes are chattering about a new deli opening up in Bexleyheath.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 5, 2013)

Brixton Hatter said:


> My original idea was to ring up all the estate agents and say I own a load of old victorian houses in Brixton that I'm _desperate _to get rid of quickly (cashflow problems) and give them a load of appointment times and addresses all over the borough........then go down the pub, sit back and enjoy.



A pub conveniently located so that you can watch Fuckstons minis buzzing back and forth all day?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 5, 2013)

snowy_again said:


> There's an Economist article today citing the polarisation of Islington as the chattering classes get priced out, leaving them with no option other than to bite the bullet and move south.



My heart is bleeding for them.

No, hold on, that's my haemorrhoids bleeding for them!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 5, 2013)

oryx said:


> Gentrifiers reap what they sow. I give it five years before the chattering classes are chattering about a new deli opening up in Bexleyheath.



And so the eternal cycling of the wealthy between centre and periphery will continue, with the poor shoved hither, thither and yon, by the elbows-out "chattering classes" and their wannabees.


----------



## leanderman (Oct 6, 2013)

snowy_again said:


> There's an Economist article today citing the polarisation of Islington as the chattering classes get priced out, leaving them with no option other than to bite the bullet and move south.



Guy who wrote that lives opposite. Spoke to him yesterday about it and he sees pricing out as being a matter of 'choice'. When really it is the opposite.


----------



## Manter (Oct 6, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Guy who wrote that lives opposite. Spoke to him yesterday about it and he sees pricing out as being a matter of 'choice'. When really it is the opposite.


How is it choice? Don't understand his theory


----------



## leanderman (Oct 6, 2013)

I said I'd quite like a larger place, or at least one with a proper garden, but have found that impossible locally, because of soaring prices, yet don't want to have to move further out. He replied: 'Well, that's your choice.'

I suppose it is. But it's less choice than I had only a couple of years ago.


----------



## pinkmonkey (Oct 6, 2013)

leanderman said:


> I don't understand how people can afford these prices, in terms of salary multiples, if nothing else.


Wealthy cash buyers, they don't have salaries, they have trusts. Sure I read somewhere that houses at that price don't tend to be bought with mortgages.


----------



## leanderman (Oct 6, 2013)

pinkmonkey said:


> Wealthy cash buyers, they don't have salaries, they have trusts. Sure I read somewhere that houses at that price don't tend to be bought with mortgages.



A sale in our road two years ago went unrecorded, with the house being registered in an offshore trust. Occupied by a very alternative-looking student girl - presumably the heiress - and her mates.


----------



## editor (Oct 6, 2013)

I was talking to someone last night - someone who is heavily linked with Brixton properties* - and he was very much of the opinion that people living in "subsidised" council estates in Brixton should be forced to move away to make way for the new wealth coming in. No, really.  

His argument was that "If I cant afford to buy a house here, why should they be allowed to live here."

He didn't specify where these poor people should go.

(*I don't want to say who here so please don't post up guesses, but happy to share via PM)


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Oct 6, 2013)

.oops


----------



## shifting gears (Oct 6, 2013)

editor said:


> I was talking to someone last night - someone who is heavily linked with Brixton properties* - and he was very much of the opinion that people living in "subsidised" council estates in Brixton should be forced to move away to make way for the new wealth coming in. No, really.
> 
> His argument was that "If I cant afford to buy a house here, why should they be allowed to live here."
> 
> ...



Not really sure why you wouldn't name and shame someone with such a nihilistic attitude towards the area

But that said, can I chime in with the first 'Cunt'

Cheers


----------



## han (Oct 7, 2013)

That's shocking. :-\


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Oct 7, 2013)

editor said:


> I was talking to someone last night - someone who is heavily linked with Brixton properties* - and he was very much of the opinion that people living in "subsidised" council estates in Brixton should be forced to move away to make way for the new wealth coming in. No, really.
> 
> His argument was that "If I cant afford to buy a house here, why should they be allowed to live here."
> 
> ...


fucks sake, what an arsehole


----------



## CH1 (Oct 7, 2013)

editor said:


> I was talking to someone last night - someone who is heavily linked with Brixton properties* - and he was very much of the opinion that people living in "subsidised" council estates in Brixton should be forced to move away to make way for the new wealth coming in. No, really.
> His argument was that "If I cant afford to buy a house here, why should they be allowed to live here." He didn't specify where these poor people should go.


It seems to have come to this with Lend Lease in Elephant & Castle. The Heygate is gone and now Southwark Council have threatened the shopping centre owner with compulsory purchase unless they agree with a "partner" to have total demolition and rebuild.
Brixton residents need to be vigilant. So far Lambeth schemes have been mixed upgrades with new private - Guinness Trust, Myatts Fields, Stockwell Park/Robsart. Read this description of Myatts Fields: "This PFI contract encompasses nearly 1000 properties, and features the reprovision of 305 existing Lambeth dwellings and the refurbishment of 172 leaseholder properties. As part of the private cross subsidy a further 503 apartments and houses for sale, rent and shared ownership will be constructed." This is the development being marketed as "Oval Quarter" in Hong Kong and Kuala Lumpur.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 7, 2013)

editor said:


> I was talking to someone last night - someone who is heavily linked with Brixton properties* - and he was very much of the opinion that people living in "subsidised" council estates in Brixton should be forced to move away to make way for the new wealth coming in. No, really.
> 
> His argument was that "If I cant afford to buy a house here, why should they be allowed to live here."
> 
> ...



Property-owner scumbag in "shit attitude towards people who don't own property" shocker!
Prevalent attitude, too.  Even a few of our Labour councillors have expressed similar sentiments amid their whining about Lambeth having "too much" social housing.

Cunts, and rapists of livestock, the lot of 'em.


----------



## T & P (Oct 7, 2013)

editor said:


> (*I don't want to say who here so please don't post up guesses, but happy to share via PM)


 I think you're being far too kind. I think anyone with such opinion should be brought into the public eye and invited to defend/ expand on such appalling views.


----------



## cuppa tee (Oct 7, 2013)

CH1 said:


> This is the development being marketed as "Oval Quarter" in Hong Kong and Kuala Lumpur.



As a slight aside, I have been looking at this
https://twitter.com/OvalQuarter
and it appears the marketing team are dipping into
local blogs and listings presumably to sell the area
to potential buyers.


----------



## editor (Oct 7, 2013)

cuppa tee said:


> As a slight aside, I have been looking at this
> https://twitter.com/OvalQuarter
> and it appears the marketing team are dipping into
> local blogs and listings presumably to sell the area
> to potential buyers.


"London’s most dynamic and desirable new neighbourhood". I'm not interested unless there's vibrancy going on.


----------



## cuppa tee (Oct 7, 2013)

editor said:


> "London’s most dynamic and desirable new neighbourhood". I'm not interested unless there's vibrancy going on.


Potential punters would probably find 24/7 vibrancy a pain in the arse but it's nice if it's within easy reach if desired.


----------



## CH1 (Oct 7, 2013)

editor said:


> "London’s most dynamic and desirable new neighbourhood". I'm not interested unless there's vibrancy going on.


Its got a very vibrant website: http://www.ovalquarter.com/
I'm sure the other day I found myself looking down the barrels of the guns outside the Imperial War Museum on there. They definitely claim the Ritzy as local. And the Festival Hall. If they get the Town Hall Campus contract you know what you'll get - PFI and all.


----------



## T & P (Oct 7, 2013)

For what I read in the Brixton news thread, the floor at The Albert is nothing if not vibrant these days...


----------



## editor (Oct 7, 2013)

T & P said:


> For what I read in the Brixton news thread, the floor at The Albert is nothing if not vibrant these days...


Its vibrancy can't even be contained by floorboards. It's vibrancy unleashed.


----------



## Gramsci (Oct 13, 2013)

cuppa tee said:


> As a slight aside, I have been looking at this
> https://twitter.com/OvalQuarter
> and it appears the marketing team are dipping into
> local blogs and listings presumably to sell the area
> to potential buyers.



Had a look at there twitter. They put up this article from the Telegraph. The lastest thing is to rent in London not buy. As London is so expensive buy a place outside London as buy to let property.

Housing in this country is in mad situation.


----------



## leanderman (Oct 13, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> Had a look at there twitter. They put up this article from the Telegraph. The lastest thing is to rent in London not buy. As London is so expensive buy a place outside London as buy to let property.
> 
> Housing in this country is in mad situation.



That article makes no sense at all. 

FT points out this weekend that in most places it is cheaper to rent than to buy under the new help to buy 95pc mortgage scheme.


----------



## CH1 (Oct 13, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> Had a look at there twitter. They put up this article from the Telegraph. The lastest thing is to rent in London not buy. As London is so expensive buy a place outside London as buy to let property.
> 
> Housing in this country is in mad situation.


So even buy to let investors are being forced out by high London prices.
Actually I think the whole buy to let business is comparable to the fad for time shares about 20 years ago. It all ought to end in tears - but who can say when the markets themselves are now manipulated by the Bank of England and the US Federal Reserve Bank?


----------



## leanderman (Oct 14, 2013)

CH1 said:


> So even buy to let investors are being forced out by high London prices.
> Actually I think the whole buy to let business is comparable to the fad for time shares about 20 years ago. It all ought to end in tears - but who can say when the markets themselves are now manipulated by the Bank of England and the US Federal Reserve Bank?



A rich person can put down £500,000 on a Notting Hill flat and borrow the remaining £500,000 interest only for £1500pm. Let it out at £3000pm and also expect its value to increase by 10pc a year. 


So, a £120,000 annual return on the £500,000. 

Bonkers.


----------



## Pinggoombah (Oct 14, 2013)

leanderman said:


> A rich person can put down £500,000 on a Notting Hill flat and borrow the remaining £500,000 interest only for £1500pm. Let it out at £3000pm and also expect its value to increase by 10pc a year.
> 
> 
> So, a £120,000 annual return on the £500,000.
> ...


If that were true then listed property companies would be doing it. They're not.


----------



## leanderman (Oct 14, 2013)

Pinggoombah said:


> If that were true then listed property companies would be doing it. They're not.



You think the maths is wrong?


----------



## Pinggoombah (Oct 14, 2013)

leanderman said:


> You think the maths is wrong?


No, but the accountants from the UK's least ethical, capitalist, money grabbing plcs seemingly do.


----------



## snowy_again (Oct 14, 2013)

Cos that equation is based on making full income and doesn't account for voids, management costs, wear & tear, crazy expectations of clients?


----------



## Ms T (Oct 14, 2013)

Plus tax on the rental income.


----------



## leanderman (Oct 14, 2013)

Ms T said:


> Plus tax on the rental income.



Yes. It ignores costs and voids. But it is still a nice margin.

Few landlords pay tax on rental income because they set their mortgage near the level of the rent.

Or take the cash in hand. Like one in this road: £3,000pm tax-free and no mortgage!


----------



## 5t3IIa (Oct 14, 2013)

T & P said:


> For what I read in the Brixton news thread, the floor at The Albert is nothing if not vibrant these days...



What _is _up with that? Does anyone know?


----------



## Rushy (Oct 14, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Yes. It ignores costs and voids. But it is still a nice margin.
> 
> Few landlords pay tax on rental income because they set their mortgage near the level of the rent.
> 
> Or take the cash in hand. Like one in this road: £3,000pm tax-free and no mortgage!



How do you know all their arrangements? 
Have you shopped them? It's just one call: 
http://search2.hmrc.gov.uk/kb5/hmrc/contactus/view.page?record=tRNNy6edopA


----------



## editor (Oct 14, 2013)

5t3IIa said:


> What _is _up with that? Does anyone know?



It's a new landmass forming in front of our very eyes.


----------



## 5t3IIa (Oct 14, 2013)

editor said:


> It's a new landmass forming in front of our very eyes.



Quick! Divide it into plots and apply for planning permission!


----------



## leanderman (Oct 14, 2013)

Rushy said:


> How do you know all their arrangements?
> Have you shopped them? It's just one call:
> http://search2.hmrc.gov.uk/kb5/hmrc/contactus/view.page?record=tRNNy6edopA



Tenants told me. I have not shopped the landlord.


----------



## Ms T (Oct 14, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Yes. It ignores costs and voids. But it is still a nice margin.
> 
> Few landlords pay tax on rental income because they set their mortgage near the level of the rent.
> 
> Or take the cash in hand. Like one in this road: £3,000pm tax-free and no mortgage!



So they're not actually making any profit, other than the capital gain on the flat?


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Oct 14, 2013)

Ms T said:


> So they're not actually making any profit, other than the capital gain on the flat?


 
If you're covering your mortgage with the rent then you make a load of money on selling a property even without any capital gain.

Not aiming at you particularly but it strikes me as odd how often that point is missed when this sort of thing is discussed.


----------



## Ms T (Oct 14, 2013)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> If you're covering your mortgage with the rent then you make a load of money on selling a property even without any capital gain.
> 
> Not aiming at you particularly but it strikes me as odd how often that point is missed when this sort of thing is discussed.


Not if it's interest only.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Oct 14, 2013)

Ms T said:


> Not if it's interest only.


 
Fair point but does anyone do that? Can you get a BTL mortgage on an interest only basis (or any mortgage these days)?


----------



## leanderman (Oct 14, 2013)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Fair point but does anyone do that? Can you get a BTL mortgage on an interest only basis (or any mortgage these days)?



BTL mortgages are mainly interest only.

Landlords don't want repayment mortgages because there is no tax relief of the repayment bit.

They aim to break even and only have a tax bill until they sell up (which my mate did and then found an accountant to cut the bill to peanuts)

Of course landlords with loads of properties and equity in them should pay tax.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Oct 14, 2013)

leanderman said:


> BTL mortgages are mainly interest only.
> 
> Landlords don't want repayment mortgages because there is no tax relief of the repayment bit.
> 
> ...


 
Ok that makes sense. But then why are rents far more than you'd pay interest on an interest only mortgage (and increasing regularly)?


----------



## leanderman (Oct 14, 2013)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Ok that makes sense. But then why are rents far more than you'd pay interest on an interest only mortgage (and increasing regularly)?



Agent costs, contracts, repairs, insurance, wear and tear I suppose. 

After that, they will have to pay tax on the difference.

But the property would also be put in the name of a non-working spouse to take advantage of a lower tax rate and tax-free allowance.

It may be that landlords shift parts of their domestic mortgage on to the BTL place too.

It's a very easy game to play it seems.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Oct 14, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Agent costs, contracts, repairs, insurance, wear and tear I suppose.
> 
> After that, they will have to pay tax on the difference.
> 
> ...


 
I'm sure there's all sorts of games they play. I don't believe those costs amount to anything like the difference though. In general to rent a place isn't a million miles away from the cost of a repayment mortgage (even if the place was bought for a lot less). I can't see there are many (any?) landlords out there charging mortgage interest + costs as rent.


----------



## leanderman (Oct 14, 2013)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> I'm sure there's all sorts of games they play. I don't believe those costs amount to anything like the difference though. In general to rent a place isn't a million miles away from the cost of a repayment mortgage (even if the place was bought for a lot less). I can't see there are many (any?) landlords out there charging mortgage interest + costs as rent.



That probably is now becoming the case.

Which makes private renting very difficult.


----------



## secateurz (Oct 15, 2013)

Pinggoombah said:


> If that were true then listed property companies would be doing it. They're not.



plenty of property funds are doing it


----------



## leanderman (Oct 17, 2013)

The madness continues:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/lond...ctor-rents-8886268.html?origin=internalSearch

Seems to suggest that wages are so low, and private rents so high, that 47 per cent of working households in London rely on housing benefit.

It also backs up the social cleansing idea: the number of claimants in central London is falling while rising further out.


----------



## leanderman (Oct 22, 2013)

And Hugo son-of-Malcolm Rifkind explains why in a cynical piece in the Times:

*If buying a home is bad, renting is far worse*
_I'm a landlord myself, so I know. Why wouldn't we charge high rents if this skewed market allows us to?_
_
Three years ago, with one kid already and another in what I probably shouldn't refer to as "the pipeline", my wife and I were trying and failing to sell our flat ... We took what felt like the foolish and perhaps downright irresponsible decision to remortgage to the absolute limit that our bank would allow and use the lump sum as a deposit on our new place. Renting the first out would cover the second mortgage, we reckoned, and we'd put it back on the market in a year.

Did we hell. A month in, I remember looking at a bank statement, at the figure going out, and the higher figure coming in — the one we'd settled for, not even the one the estate agent had advertised — and wondering whether somebody had made a mistake. One day the Rifkind finances may all go horribly wrong, like Ireland's did. But until then? It's money for nothing.

Such is the soaring lunacy of London property that ... even for the mildly loaded there are killings to be made. That flat I found in Camberwell, up top? Equivalents seem to be worth about £350,000. If you could find a deposit of £50,000, your interest-only mortgage payments would set you back about £1,000 a month — two thirds of the rental price.

What, though, to do? Taxing buy-to-let more heavily could help but might push up rents. Rent controls sound appealing only until you speak to any economist. The best thing you can say for the faintly maniacal Help to Buy scheme is it might provide a brief lull

But when the market sets a price, who'd be the fool not to charge it?  In London, the price is high for the reason that prices are always high, which from my GCSE economics I remember to be too much demand chasing not enough supply. We don't have enough houses. We need to build more._


----------



## leanderman (Oct 23, 2013)

And, to keep up the monologue, a chart showing that rents in Lambeth are rising but less than in some other parts

http://www.rentonomy.com/posts/133


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Oct 23, 2013)

leanderman said:


> And, to keep up the monologue, a chart showing that rents in Lambeth are rising but less than in some other parts
> 
> http://www.rentonomy.com/posts/133


 
A Borough is a fairly arbitrary area to look at for these things tbh. Probably easier for data collection but not really how things actually work. Also it makes the point that the high increase in costs in Tower Hamlets is apparently caused by large quantities of new build - not the same as high increases in costs of existing properties.

That said it does reemphasise that ultimately the problem is housing as a whole, more than any Brixton specific bubble.


----------



## leanderman (Oct 23, 2013)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> A Borough is a fairly arbitrary area to look at for these things tbh. Probably easier for data collection but not really how things actually work. Also it makes the point that the high increase in costs in Tower Hamlets is apparently caused by large quantities of new build - not the same as high increases in costs of existing properties.
> 
> That said it does reemphasise that ultimately the problem is housing as a whole, more than any Brixton specific bubble.



Yes. I was intrigued by the Tower Hamlets paradox. I guess it's because the area - and I lived there - may have had a majority of lower rent social housing and now has a majority of higher rent new builds.


----------



## Dan U (Oct 23, 2013)

TH could be due to the massive amount of residential development around canary wharf. Plus obviously it's got much more trendy in other parts


----------



## leanderman (Oct 23, 2013)

Dan U said:


> TH could be due to the massive amount of residential development around canary wharf. Plus obviously it's got much more trendy in other parts



Got trendy when we left!


----------



## CH1 (Oct 27, 2013)

Spotted my first Foxtons board on Somerleyton Road earlier today. 3 bed house (described by Foxtons as 4 bed). £450,000


----------



## leanderman (Oct 27, 2013)

CH1 said:


> Spotted my first Foxtons board on Somerleyton Road earlier today. 3 bed house (described by Foxtons as 4 bed). £450,000 View attachment 42574



They've been pretty active on Coldharbour.


----------



## SarfLondoner (Oct 27, 2013)

Next to a train track so no doubt it will be described as "vibrant"


----------



## gaijingirl (Oct 27, 2013)

SarfLondoner said:


> Next to a train track so no doubt it will be described as "vibrant"



vibrating more like..  

mind you I live opposite a train track with very deep sidings so it's actually "leafy"


----------



## SarfLondoner (Oct 27, 2013)

"leafy" is so yesterday , Its all about the V word now.


----------



## passivejoe (Nov 1, 2013)

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-41505316.html

Good, sensible pricing.


----------



## leanderman (Nov 1, 2013)

passivejoe said:


> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-41505316.html
> 
> Good, sensible pricing.



Unbelievable. The whole house was that price no more than two years ago.


----------



## simonSW2 (Nov 1, 2013)

passivejoe said:


> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-41505316.html
> 
> Good, sensible pricing.


Sudbourne Road innit. 
Add 25% onto the house prices for the school catchment.


----------



## simonSW2 (Nov 1, 2013)

Community corrosion tax.


----------



## leanderman (Nov 1, 2013)

simonSW2 said:


> Sudbourne Road innit.
> Add 25% onto the house prices for the school catchment.



Yes. Even so, this high is a new low. 

We need to re-set the property market.


----------



## Winot (Nov 1, 2013)

simonSW2 said:


> Sudbourne Road innit.
> Add 25% onto the house prices for the school catchment.



That's the Branksome Rd end by the look of things, in which case not in the catchment in recent years.


----------



## simonSW2 (Nov 1, 2013)

Winot said:


> That's the Branksome Rd end by the look of things, in which case not in the catchment in recent years.



Ah, yes, in which case it's just a thoroughly demented pricetag.


----------



## Winot (Nov 1, 2013)

simonSW2 said:


> Ah, yes, in which case it's just a thoroughly demented pricetag.



I wonder if the purchaser could sue Foxtons for misrepresenting that Sudbourne primary is 0.1 miles away?


----------



## Smick (Nov 2, 2013)

There's always the Corpus Christi catchment too.


----------



## nagapie (Nov 2, 2013)

Smick said:


> There's always the Corpus Christi catchment too.



There is no CC catchment, it's if you go to their church every Sunday.


----------



## madolesance (Nov 2, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Unbelievable. The whole house was that price no more than two years ago.



Looks like a great rental opportunity for anyone looking to get their kids into Sudbourne Primary.


----------



## Winot (Nov 3, 2013)

madolesance said:


> Looks like a great rental opportunity for anyone looking to get their kids into Sudbourne Primary.



See post #1117.


----------



## leanderman (Nov 3, 2013)

Winot said:


> See post #1117.



School intake doubling to 90, probably in 2014.


----------



## leanderman (Nov 3, 2013)

nagapie said:


> There is no CC catchment, it's if you go to their church every Sunday.



And have cash. Free school meal rate now at a near-Etonian 8 per cent.


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Nov 3, 2013)




----------



## Smick (Nov 3, 2013)

nagapie said:


> There is no CC catchment, it's if you go to their church every Sunday.


 It's go to 'a' catholic church every Sunday and live in their catchment. They didn't want to exclude people who bring their kids to foreign language mass so going to their church is not mandatory. Their catchment is based on two-thirds of kids living in the parish boundary of CC and one-third from the Herne Hill catholic church. If you live outside that and go to CC every Sunday you won't get in, even with a letter of recommendation from the pope.


----------



## nagapie (Nov 3, 2013)

Smick said:


> It's go to 'a' catholic church every Sunday and live in their catchment. They didn't want to exclude people who bring their kids to foreign language mass so going to their church is not mandatory. Their catchment is based on two-thirds of kids living in the parish boundary of CC and one-third from the Herne Hill catholic church. If you live outside that and go to CC every Sunday you won't get in, even with a letter of recommendation from the pope.



That's only because they have enough middle class, well-off parents who go to their church every Sunday to fill from their catchment area, which of course includes HH. But you can live next door and not be Catholic and a letter from no one will get you in. 

Personally I don't live in catchment and I wouldn't send my child to a Catholic school but I know a lot of parents who live on that road who seethe at the thought that their children are not allowed in.


----------



## Smick (Nov 3, 2013)

We were prepared to bite the bullet, rediscover our Catholicism every week and put in an application for CC but although there are kids on our road who go, the catchment changed and my kid is now persona non grata, as they say in the Vatican.


----------



## nagapie (Nov 3, 2013)

Smick said:


> We were prepared to bite the bullet, rediscover our Catholicism every week and put in an application for CC but although there are kids on our road who go, the catchment changed and my kid is now persona non grata, as they say in the Vatican.



Lots of kids on my road go to CC. Not sure how religious their parents were before school going time but they are certainly there every Sunday now as I believe not going regularly puts a black mark next to your name; although the Head has changed this year I've heard. The catchment of course is different to everywhere else. We are actually in this year's CC catchment as my friend up the road sent her daughter but we are definitely not in Sudbourne's catchment, showing how much bigger CC's is because it's exclusive.

So where is your child? PM me if you don't want to say online. I am interested as I'm looking at primaries now and am glad to say that actually visiting a lot of them has made me feel much better - they are on the whole mostly fine, even the not sought after ones.


----------



## Winot (Nov 3, 2013)

leanderman said:


> School intake doubling to 90, probably in 2014.



Of course, had forgotten that. Phew - let the property price rise continue!


----------



## shakespearegirl (Nov 3, 2013)

http://m.haart.co.uk/HRT011107771

Obviously property isn't booming as much as some people think. This house was on about a month ago with an open day and guide price of 740-780.


----------



## CH1 (Nov 3, 2013)

shakespearegirl said:


> http://m.haart.co.uk/HRT011107771
> Obviously property isn't booming as much as some people think. This house was on about a month ago with an open day and guide price of 740-780.


Hint: This thread is about Foxtons. Also, out of touch as I am with the current boom, I'm wondering if the slightly off-the-beaten track location and small rooms are holding it back. These are artisan cottages (albeit now a conservation area). I do remember the rooms as small - I went to a party in of those houses (years ago though).


----------



## leanderman (Nov 3, 2013)

shakespearegirl said:


> http://m.haart.co.uk/HRT011107771
> 
> Obviously property isn't booming as much as some people think. This house was on about a month ago with an open day and guide price of 740-780.



But, most of the time, the SOLD signs are going up pretty rapidly.

It's inexplicable.

Presumably people are taking out enormously long and perhaps interest-only mortgages.


----------



## Smick (Nov 3, 2013)

nagapie said:


> Lots of kids on my road go to CC. Not sure how religious their parents were before school going time but they are certainly there every Sunday now as I believe not going regularly puts a black mark next to your name; although the Head has changed this year I've heard. The catchment of course is different to everywhere else. We are actually in this year's CC catchment as my friend up the road sent her daughter but we are definitely not in Sudbourne's catchment, showing how much bigger CC's is because it's exclusive.
> 
> So where is your child? PM me if you don't want to say online. I am interested as I'm looking at primaries now and am glad to say that actually visiting a lot of them has made me feel much better - they are on the whole mostly fine, even the not sought after ones.


 
Streatham Wells.

It's a lovely school and certainly different to what I grew up with.

We were worried she'd get Fenstanton, what with the stabbing and other problems but I am sure there are teachers busting a gut and loving parents who want the best for their kids there too.

So much education happens in the home anyway.


----------



## Rushy (Nov 3, 2013)

leanderman said:


> But, most of the time, the SOLD signs are going up pretty rapidly.
> 
> It's inexplicable.
> 
> Presumably people are taking out enormously long and perhaps interest-only mortgages.


3 bed house on Brixton Water Lane went for 1,403,000. That's the official land registry price (not agent marketing price which was 1,250,000). Swiss bloke and paid cash, so I'm told.


----------



## shakespearegirl (Nov 5, 2013)

CH1 said:


> Hint: This thread is about Foxtons. Also, out of touch as I am with the current boom, I'm wondering if the slightly off-the-beaten track location and small rooms are holding it back. These are artisan cottages (albeit now a conservation area). I do remember the rooms as small - I went to a party in of those houses (years ago though).



The thread has veered away from Foxtons quite a bit 

My point was they'd overpriced it. One on the opposite side of the street went for 200k less a few weeks beforehand. It was only 2 beds and not as high end a finish, but bigger garden


----------



## CH1 (Nov 6, 2013)

shakespearegirl said:


> The thread has veered away from Foxtons quite a bit
> My point was they'd overpriced it. One on the opposite side of the street went for 200k less a few weeks beforehand. It was only 2 beds and not as high end a finish, but bigger garden


I had intended smart Alec repartee to the effect that Foxtons would have got more. Not that you digressed!


----------



## Rushy (Nov 6, 2013)

This sold for 1,195,000 in May. 

Now back on the market for £2,000,000. That's a cool 65% rise - without any improvements carried out.

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-28439394.html


----------



## leanderman (Nov 6, 2013)

Rushy said:


> This sold for 1,195,000 in May.
> 
> Now back on the market for £2,000,000. That's a cool 65% rise - without any improvements carried out.
> 
> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-28439394.html



WHAT IS GOING ON?


----------



## Remus Harbank (Nov 6, 2013)

leanderman said:


> WHAT IS GOING ON?


a bubble to end all bubbles.


----------



## CH1 (Nov 6, 2013)

shakespearegirl said:


> http://m.haart.co.uk/HRT011107771
> Obviously property isn't booming as much as some people think. This house was on about a month ago with an open day and guide price of 740-780.





Rushy said:


> This sold for 1,195,000 in May.
> Now back on the market for £2,000,000. That's a cool 65% rise - without any improvements carried out.
> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-28439394.html


Surely the Effra Road property is in line with the Archbishop's place one price-wise?
Grand terrace with self contained one bedroom flat included - compared to a workman's cottage with "fantastically snug" reception and "Tardis-like upper floors" (quoting the estate agent here).
What would annoy me would be if it turned out that LB Lambeth or SLAM had sold the Effra Road property to a developer so they could make an almost instant 67% profit. I know there are/were some properties used for people "out on license" on that part of Effra Road.  And SLAM/LB Lambeth have form on property deals which scarecly maxed their return - look at the Learning Difficulties team building (ex-1950s registry office) at 340 Brixton Road. Now part of the Lexadon empire.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 6, 2013)

leanderman said:


> WHAT IS GOING ON?



Punting - the hope that someone with more readies than brains will take the bait. Saw this happen in the '80s and '90s, generally toward the end of a boom.


----------



## Rushy (Nov 6, 2013)

CH1 said:


> Surely the Effra Road property is in line with the Archbishop's place one price-wise?
> Grand terrace with self contained one bedroom flat included - compared to a workman's cottage with "fantastically snug" reception and "Tardis-like upper floors" (quoting the estate agent here).
> What would annoy me would be if it turned out that LB Lambeth or SLAM had sold the Effra Road property to a developer so they could make an almost instant 67% profit. I know there are/were some properties used for people "out on license" on that part of Effra Road.  And SLAM/LB Lambeth have form on property deals which scarecly maxed their return - look at the Learning Difficulties team building (ex-1950s registry office) at 340 Brixton Road. Now part of the Lexadon empire.


No - it was a Portuguese family. I remember Lambeth wanting to sell one like you describe on the corner of Mervan Road at auction - they would not allow viewings "in case of disturbing the occupants" who were about to be thrown out. You can imagine what effect that would have on the price.

I have no idea whether this is true but someone mentioned that Foxtons have a property fund and the Effra one made me wonder...


----------



## innit (Nov 6, 2013)

shakespearegirl said:


> http://m.haart.co.uk/HRT011107771
> 
> Obviously property isn't booming as much as some people think. This house was on about a month ago with an open day and guide price of 740-780.


I understand they have had offers but haven't accepted yet as the prospective buyer (not me) has a flat to sell.


----------



## Gramsci (Nov 6, 2013)

nagapie said:


> That's only because they have enough middle class, well-off parents who go to their church every Sunday to fill from their catchment area, which of course includes HH. But you can live next door and not be Catholic and a letter from no one will get you in.
> 
> Personally I don't live in catchment and I wouldn't send my child to a Catholic school but I know a lot of parents who live on that road who seethe at the thought that their children are not allowed in.



I overheard some parents recently talking about how to get there children into schools. One said he was going the the Catholic church so that his kid could get into the local Catholic school. They note how many times u attend. You had to attend for a good amount of time for it to count. He also said that doing things like baking cakes for school events got points as well.


----------



## leanderman (Nov 7, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> I overheard some parents recently talking about how to get there children into schools. One said he was going the the Catholic church so that his kid could get into the local Catholic school. They note how many times u attend. You had to attend for a good amount of time for it to count. He also said that doing things like baking cakes for school events got points as well.



Of course. This is exactly how it works. And it is very wrong. 

Corpus Christi, for example, manages by such means to keep its Free School Meal rate - a rough proxy for deprivation - down to 8 per cent. 

Other Brixton Hill area primaries, which cannot select on the sly, generally have FSM rates of more than 50 per cent.

The classic trick at CChristi is helping run the playgroup. Together with arse-on-pew it just about guarantees a place for your child in a classroom free of vexing ruffians from those awful council estates. 

Of course, families can also live inside catchment areas of non-faith schools for dubiously short periods: something I've undertaken.


----------



## editor (Nov 7, 2013)

Religious schools should be banned. School's for learning, not indoctrination, and it's hugely unhealthy to segregate children in this way. Kids should be able to learn about _all _religions (and atheism etc) and interact with each other.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 7, 2013)

editor said:


> Religious schools should be banned. School's for learning, not indoctrination, and it's hugely unhealthy to segregate children in this way. Kids should be able to learn about all religions (and atheism etc) and interact with each other.



Yes this ^


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 7, 2013)

editor said:


> Religious schools should be banned. School's for learning, not indoctrination, and it's hugely unhealthy to segregate children in this way. Kids should be able to learn about _all _religions (and atheism etc) and interact with each other.


schools have always been for indoctrination, whether secular or religious.


----------



## Winot (Nov 7, 2013)

editor said:


> Religious schools should be banned. School's for learning, not indoctrination, and it's hugely unhealthy to segregate children in this way. Kids should be able to learn about _all _religions (and atheism etc) and interact with each other.



Amen to that.


----------



## leanderman (Nov 7, 2013)

editor said:


> Religious schools should be banned. School's for learning, not indoctrination, and it's hugely unhealthy to segregate children in this way. Kids should be able to learn about _all _religions (and atheism etc) and interact with each other.



Don't ban them: just withdraw their state funding!

Faith schools are divisive and doctrinaire but it's much more significant that their admissions procedures lead to the exclusion of poorer kids. 

Families and the schools collude in this because it improves results.


----------



## editor (Nov 7, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Don't ban them: just withdraw their state funding!


Privately funded faith schools would be even worse.


----------



## leanderman (Nov 7, 2013)

editor said:


> Privately funded faith schools would be even worse.



Depressingly, the new 'free' secondary school for Brixton Hill, Clapham Common and Balham is to have a 'Catholic ethos'.


----------



## Rushy (Nov 7, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Depressingly, the new 'free' secondary school for Brixton Hill, Clapham Common and Balham is to have a 'Catholic ethos'.


Well I hope they choose which aspects they intend to follow very carefully


----------



## nagapie (Nov 7, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Depressingly, the new 'free' secondary school for Brixton Hill, Clapham Common and Balham is to have a 'Catholic ethos'.


What and where is this school? And why is Lambeth allowing this? They've blocked other free schools and we need primaries.


----------



## leanderman (Nov 7, 2013)

nagapie said:


> What and where is this school? And why is Lambeth allowing this? They've blocked other free schools and we need primaries.



Called Trinity. No site chosen. But theoretically centred on Clapham Common clock tower

http://www.trinityacademylondon.org/


----------



## Smick (Nov 7, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Called Trinity. No site chosen. But theoretically centred on Clapham Common clock tower
> 
> http://www.trinityacademylondon.org/



There is another school with Catholic ethos in between Streatham Hill and Clapham, http://www.thelaurelsschool.org.uk/

I think it will take the first kids next September.

£3,900 per child per term. £12 grand a year, give or take, before you've bought a uniform or gone on a school trip. 40% reduction for the third child though. £31k instead of £36k if you have three kids.


----------



## leanderman (Nov 7, 2013)

Smick said:


> There is another school with Catholic ethos in between Streatham Hill and Clapham, http://www.thelaurelsschool.org.uk/
> 
> A new private school opening. That's rare surely?
> 
> ...


----------



## Smick (Nov 7, 2013)

I have to say though, there is no low I will not sink to if I think it is for the good of my daughter. If I were to get a bursary on the basis of not having enough money to send her to The Laurels, I probably would. Although I wouldn't want her to be in the position where she is the poorest kid and I can't afford to buy her what her peers get.


----------



## leanderman (Nov 7, 2013)

Smick said:


> I have to say though, there is no low I will not sink to if I think it is for the good of my daughter. If I were to get a bursary on the basis of not having enough money to send her to The Laurels, I probably would. Although I wouldn't want her to be in the position where she is the poorest kid and I can't afford to buy her what her peers get.



I'd also do - and have done - just about anything. Except bow to Rome. 

Ridiculously, recidivistically, I'd have no such problems with the Church of England.


----------



## nagapie (Nov 7, 2013)

I, however, must be a lesser parent. I can't be bothered to either move house or feign religion.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 7, 2013)

nagapie said:


> I, however, must be a lesser parent. I can't be bothered to either move house or feign religion.


im amazed anyone can "pretend" go to church every week. even that bit about making a cake sounds like a hassle.



leanderman said:


> Faith schools are divisive and doctrinaire but it's much more significant that their admissions procedures lead to the exclusion of poorer kids.
> .


i thought the whole thing is that its not about money, its about whether you go to the church or not? how do they exclude poorer kids?


 my mind is boggled by those house prices posted above.... i want to type something but its too insane


----------



## leanderman (Nov 8, 2013)

nagapie said:


> I, however, must be a lesser parent. I can't be bothered to either move house or feign religion.



Friend visited the local secondary schools this year ... her eldest is five years old and in year 1.


----------



## leanderman (Nov 8, 2013)

ska invita said:


> i thought the whole thing is that its not about money, its about whether you go to the church or not? how do they exclude poorer kids?



They don't actively exclude poorer kids but, somehow, the pews, and voluntary positions, at the relevant church, at the relevant time, are occupied by the well-heeled with young kids.


----------



## Smick (Nov 8, 2013)

Gramsci said:


> I overheard some parents recently talking about how to get there children into schools. One said he was going the the Catholic church so that his kid could get into the local Catholic school. They note how many times u attend. You had to attend for a good amount of time for it to count. He also said that doing things like baking cakes for school events got points as well.


You'd imagine that you have to be admitted before they'll allow you to get involved in the school events.

When we tried attending church, you had to sign in if you had kids. It is the parent who signs in. With all the depravity that has gone on in the catholic church, it's probably not a bad idea to keep a record of which adults are at the child specific elements.


----------



## CH1 (Nov 8, 2013)

Smick said:


> There is another school with Catholic ethos in between Streatham Hill and Clapham, http://www.thelaurelsschool.org.uk/
> 
> I think it will take the first kids next September.
> 
> £3,900 per child per term. £12 grand a year, give or take, before you've bought a uniform or gone on a school trip. 40% reduction for the third child though. £31k instead of £36k if you have three kids.


I wondered what happened to the building previously occupied by Mosaic Clubhouse.
As you would expect in Lambeth there has been some asset stripping jiggery pokery.
Close down the Effra day centre for the mentally ill. Sell the clubhouse building off. Move clubhouse into the Effra building.
Bingo. Effra re-opens as a work-related centre for the mentally ill (i.e. Mosaic Clubhouse)
You have a £12,000 a year Catholic private school for girls belonging to the top nobs you are attracting into the borough (with added large family discount for following the Catholic line on birth control).
And no Effra day centre to fund.
Well done Donatus And Lambeth Social Services (not forgetting whichever estate agent is performing the function of Borough Valuer these days!


----------



## CH1 (Nov 11, 2013)

Just spotted a forthright anti Buy-to-let article in the FT whilst having a clear-out.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5efda336-3bfe-11e3-b85f-00144feab7de.html#axzz2kLR839AU
Google 
*Buy-to-let, not Help to Buy, is the real scourge of Generation Rent*
if you don't want to register to acess FT


----------



## leanderman (Nov 11, 2013)

Gentrification celebration on the Josephine Avenue notice board in SW2


----------



## ash (Nov 11, 2013)

Not Foxtons, but £750,000 for 2 bedrooms  and a downstairs bathroom !!

http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/30404171


----------



## cuppa tee (Nov 11, 2013)

ash said:


> Not Foxtons, but £750,000 for 2 bedrooms  and a downstairs bathroom !!
> 
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/30404171



These words 





> the most discerning of applicants


 make me want to barf.......


----------



## leanderman (Nov 11, 2013)

ash said:


> Not Foxtons, but £750,000 for 2 bedrooms  and a downstairs bathroom !!
> 
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/30404171



Only a few posts back I was ridiculing an Elm Park property priced at £578 sq ft

This latest is £818 sq ft


----------



## Pinggoombah (Nov 11, 2013)

CH1 said:


> Just spotted a forthright anti Buy-to-let article in the FT whilst having a clear-out.
> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5efda336-3bfe-11e3-b85f-00144feab7de.html#axzz2kLR839AU
> Google
> *Buy-to-let, not Help to Buy, is the real scourge of Generation Rent*
> if you don't want to register to acess FT


That article is poorly argued. The reason the US has better, cheaper rented property is because land is cheaper. The UK is about ten times more densely populated than the US.


----------



## Manter (Nov 11, 2013)

cuppa tee said:


> These words  make me want to barf.......


It should probably read deluded... That is a nice little cottage, but 3/4 of a million??!!!!


----------



## cuppa tee (Nov 11, 2013)

Manter said:


> It should probably read deluded... That is a nice little cottage, but 3/4 of a million??!!!!


Possibly but someone probably will have the wherewithal, didn't estate agents used to just describe properties rather than making snobbish predictions about the potential buyers....Err _applicants _FFS


----------



## leanderman (Nov 11, 2013)

Manter said:


> It should probably read deluded... That is a nice little cottage, but 3/4 of a million??!!!!



Not necessarily deluded ... someone will probably buy it for £750k and put it on the market next week for £950k


----------



## leanderman (Nov 12, 2013)

Conversation with tradesperson earlier:

Me: Do you cover Brixton?

TP: Yes. Was there on Saturday night for first time in a long time. I can't believe how much it's changed.

Me: How so?

TP: It's now so ... white. I'm black and I'd never felt a minority there before. It's much, much better though than it was ... safer, better shops, cafés. Great place to live now.


----------



## editor (Nov 22, 2013)

The Foxtons scum have infested my estate now too.


----------



## ChrisSouth (Nov 22, 2013)

editor said:


> The Foxtons scum have infested my estate now too.
> 
> View attachment 43762


 
While I feel your pain, one board isn't an infestation. However, what it represents _may _herald an impending infestation.


----------



## editor (Nov 22, 2013)

ChrisSouth said:


> While I feel your pain, one board isn't an infestation. However, what it represents _may _herald an impending infestation.


Hang on, that sign looks like it's been affixed on to the _public_ side of the street. And it's conveniently close to the recycling bins too.


----------



## Smick (Nov 22, 2013)

I've lost count of the number of wrongly affixed estate agents signs which I have destroyed.

I remember one time a flat I was living in and there was another place upstairs to let. The flat was let and then a sign went up "Let By". I thought I'd do the decent thing, phoned the agency and told them that they had 24 hours to remove it. They said that a separate company puts them up so it would be Wednesday before they could get it down. I told her she knew what was going to happen next.

God, I love being a curmudgeon.


----------



## leanderman (Nov 22, 2013)

I routinely remove them from this road.

They claim they are allowed to keep them up for a time, even after a sale or a lease has been completed.


----------



## gaijingirl (Nov 22, 2013)

leanderman said:


> I routinely remove them from this road.
> 
> They claim they are allowed to keep them up for a time, even after a sale or a lease has been completed.



so is it 24 hours?  because the place next to us had one up for about 4 months.  I don't know why it pissed me off so much.. but it did.


----------



## SarfLondoner (Nov 22, 2013)




----------



## editor (Nov 23, 2013)

Oh dear. It seems to have been blown over.


----------



## Epona (Nov 23, 2013)

Even where I live, in the arse end of East London, I get a couple of stock letters a week from Foxtons, telling me that they have tenants for my property.  It properly does my head in - this is my home, not some wanky 'investment opportunity'.  And the building society still owns it, or at least part of it (and possibly they have dibs on my soul too) for the next 12 years anyway.


----------



## leanderman (Nov 23, 2013)

Epona said:


> Even where I live, in the arse end of East London, I get a couple of stock letters a week from Foxtons, telling me that they have tenants for my property.  It properly does my head in - this is my home, not some wanky 'investment opportunity'.  And the building society still owns it, or at least part of it (and possibly they have dibs on my soul too) for the next 12 years anyway.



Only 12 years! Well played


----------



## Epona (Nov 23, 2013)

leanderman said:


> Only 12 years! Well played



Not due to anything clever that I've done, other than I've been here for 13 years - so on a 25 year mortgage, I have 12 years to go 'til I'm paid off in full.  Half way there!


----------



## leanderman (Nov 24, 2013)

Epona said:


> Not due to anything clever that I've done, other than I've been here for 13 years - so on a 25 year mortgage, I have 12 years to go 'til I'm paid off in full.  Half way there!



people buying now might be forced into 30 years - interest only - so they won't even be paying off the debt


----------



## Smick (Nov 24, 2013)

I had to go 35 years which takes me to my statutory retirement date. I haven't done interest only though. Mortgages are a balls but so is rent. Either way legions of people get rich off your toil.


----------



## shakespearegirl (Nov 25, 2013)

I just got a letter from an estate agent who has just opened a branch in Oval. 

They will sell my house for £500* 

*subject to conditions of course no details of what those conditions are.. 

How do we get these people to stop, I'm registered with TPS but it doesn't seem to make any difference to them


----------



## colacubes (Nov 25, 2013)

shakespearegirl said:


> I just got a letter from an estate agent who has just opened a branch in Oval.
> 
> They will sell my house for £500*
> 
> ...



Snap.


----------



## gaijingirl (Nov 25, 2013)

shakespearegirl said:


> I just got a letter from an estate agent who has just opened a branch in Oval.
> 
> They will sell my house for £500*
> 
> ...





colacubes said:


> Snap.



snap


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Nov 25, 2013)

leanderman said:


> I routinely remove them from this road.
> 
> They claim they are allowed to keep them up for a time, even after a sale or a lease has been completed.





gaijingirl said:


> so is it 24 hours?  because the place next to us had one up for about 4 months.  I don't know why it pissed me off so much.. but it did.


It's two weeks. After the sale/letting has been completed, they're allowed to keep the sign up for two weeks. 

Of course, they never remove them because they rely on people's inertia to give them free advertising. So after two weeks you have a free supply of firewood…..


----------



## cuppa tee (Nov 25, 2013)

shakespearegirl said:


> I'm registered with TPS but it doesn't seem to make any difference to them


afaik the TPS only deals with telephones, the MPS does a similar thing for junk mail.


----------



## shakespearegirl (Nov 25, 2013)

cuppa tee said:


> afaik the TPS only deals with telephones, the MPS does a similar thing for junk mail.



Doh at me.. 

I was did register with MPS a few years ago but have just done it again. Along with TPS again, after deleting yet another PPI message from my answerphone


----------



## cuppa tee (Nov 25, 2013)

shakespearegirl said:


> Doh at me..
> 
> I was did register with MPS a few years ago but have just done it again. Along with TPS again, after deleting yet another PPI message from my answerphone



Tbh when I worked in the call centre the number of angry people who told me they were on the tps made me wonder if those type of  schemes were any good at all.....


----------



## Winot (Nov 25, 2013)

I think estate agents get round the TPS thing by sending the mail to the 'legal owner' rather than to a named individual. 

Here you go: http://www.stopjunkmail.org.uk/faq/#q_02

The TPS can't stop phone calls originating from outside the UK afaik.


----------



## Smick (Nov 25, 2013)

gaijingirl said:


> snap


 Snap. An alliterative name.


----------



## Smick (Nov 25, 2013)

Brixton Hatter said:


> It's two weeks. After the sale/letting has been completed, they're allowed to keep the sign up for two weeks.
> 
> Of course, they never remove them because they rely on people's inertia to give them free advertising. So after two weeks you have a free supply of firewood…..


 
My issue is in a shared freehold building with an absent landlord and the sign only goes up after Rightmove says the place is let. They can say goodbye to ever seeing it again.


----------



## secateurz (Nov 27, 2013)

anybody else see Brixton in the FT on the weekend? i can upload a piccy of the article if you want


----------



## leanderman (Nov 27, 2013)

secateurz said:


> anybody else see Brixton in the FT on the weekend? i can upload a piccy of the article if you want



This last weekend? What about?


----------



## secateurz (Nov 28, 2013)

Sorry it was from the start of the month, sure you have all seen it.  My bad for not reading properly


----------



## simonSW2 (Dec 3, 2013)

Tiny one bed flat on Solon Road: £435k.

Bare jokes.


----------



## ddraig (Dec 5, 2013)

more jokes
https://twitter.com/Foxtonsproperty
https://twitter.com/Foxtonsproperty/status/408545897270611968/photo/1/large


----------



## CH1 (Dec 5, 2013)

ddraig said:


> more jokes
> https://twitter.com/Foxtonsproperty
> https://twitter.com/Foxtonsproperty/status/408545897270611968/photo/1/large


suspended when I looked?


----------



## ddraig (Dec 5, 2013)

yes, it was a joke account with a supposed letter from the CEO


----------



## secateurz (Dec 6, 2013)

so the house that sold for 1.2m in May has now gone under offer for 1.8...and no work has been done on it.

totes joke


----------



## leanderman (Dec 6, 2013)

secateurz said:


> so the house that sold for 1.2m in May has now gone under offer for 1.8...and no work has been done on it.
> 
> totes joke



It's a Ponzi scheme.


----------



## passivejoe (Jan 6, 2014)

http://www.reuters.com/video/2014/0...next-propert?videoId=276319303&videoChannel=5

Neither Vibrant of Edgy used. Just a bit out of date.


----------



## fortyplus (Jan 21, 2014)

Got home tonight to find that the cunts were selling my house.They've put the sign outside the wrong house. If nothing else it's libellous. As if I would betray my community blah blah. fuckers.


----------



## equationgirl (Jan 21, 2014)

fortyplus said:


> Got home tonight to find that the cunts were selling my house.They've put the sign outside the wrong house. If nothing else it's libellous. As if I would betray my community blah blah. fuckers.


I think you should take the sign down and stick it next to their shop somehow.


----------



## passivejoe (Jan 23, 2014)

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-29097126.html

Prices keep on rising.


----------



## leanderman (Jan 23, 2014)

passivejoe said:


> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-29097126.html
> 
> Prices keep on rising.



School cashment. 

But there is no sign of this madness ending. 

Imagine what you could buy outside London for £650,000 - instead of this two-bed flat in Brixton.


----------



## ffsear (Jan 23, 2014)

It won't go on for ever.  Interest rates will have to up eventually.   Rents will become unaffordable,  buy to let fuckers will cash in once their margins disappear!  . Fear will grip there market.


----------



## leanderman (Jan 23, 2014)

ffsear said:


> It won't go on for ever.  Interest rates will have to up eventually.   Rents will become affordable,  buy to let fuckers will cash in. Fear will grip there market



Ideally. But I wouldn't bet on it.


----------



## ffsear (Jan 23, 2014)

none of it adds up to me.  The country is on its way out of its deepest recession ever and already there's talk of a housing bubble!   Makes no sense!


----------



## Winot (Jan 23, 2014)

ffsear said:


> none of it adds up to me.  The country is on its way out of its deepest recession ever and already there's talk of a housing bubble!   Makes no sense!



It's pretty much just a London bubble though, isn't it? And one that is inflated by those who have not been affected by the recession.


----------



## ffsear (Jan 23, 2014)

Its just a London bubble yes.  I'm just questioning if its sustainable. I don't think it is and I think the rental market will lead the way down.

The buy to letters will have a choice to make when interest rates go up.  Cash in,  or put rents up.  But how far can rents be pushed up?  Given that we have a generation of 20's/30's somethings, university educated who earn upwards of £35k (the types not affected by the recession)  spending almost half if not more of their salaries on rent already.I think once the buy to letters see their margins cut, the cashing in option will seem much brighter, given the cost of maintaining such properties (my landlords just today forked out £1k on a new boiler).  The media will be all over it,   enter the hysteria and the madness of crowd mentality and sellers flood the market.




This is what I wish.


----------



## Rushy (Jan 23, 2014)

ffsear said:


> Its just a London bubble yes.  I'm just questioning if its sustainable. I don't think it is and I think the rental market will lead the way down.
> 
> The buy to letters will have a choice to make when interest rates go up.  Cash in,  or put rents up.  But how far can rents be pushed up?  Given that we have a generation of 20's/30's somethings, university educated who earn upwards of £35k (the types not affected by the recession)  spending almost half if not more of their salaries on rent already.I think once the buy to letters see their margins cut, the cashing in option will seem much brighter, given the cost of maintaining such properties (my landlords just today forked out £1k on a new boiler).  The media will be all over it,  enter the hysteria and the madness of crowd mentality and sellers flood the market.



But there is scope for banks to cushion interest rate increases to an extent. Before the crash banks were happy lending on a 1% margin over base for commercial deals like buy to let - or even less. When rates went down, mortgages did not go down the same amount unless you were on a base rate tracker. Loads of banks stopped lending and those which did not filled the void by increasing their margins, rather than passing on the falls. Now buy to let margins are commonly 4% or more over base. I'm sure they'd rather not reduce margins but competition (more lenders getting into the market) and a reducing demand (if rates go up) could push them down.


----------



## leanderman (Jan 23, 2014)

Rushy said:


> But there is scope for banks to cushion interest rate increases to an extent.  I'm sure they'd rather not reduce margins but competition (more lenders getting into the market) and a reducing demand (if rates go up) could push them down.



Absolutely: mortgage rate margins are massive right now. 

Base plus say 4 per cent.

I don't think that will happen when base is at 4 per cent.

If it does, I lose my home!


----------



## fortyplus (Jan 23, 2014)

ffsear said:


> It won't go on for ever.  Interest rates will have to up eventually.   Rents will become unaffordable,  buy to let fuckers will cash in once their margins disappear!  . Fear will grip there market.


If I had a penny for every time I've heard similar sentiments about London property prices since forever, I'd be rich.... Every time I've agreed and thought, this time people will see sense. Briefly, in the early 90s,  when Lamont burst the Lawson bubble caused by the removal of multiple mortgage interest tax relief, we did have some falling property prices and a few people might have been in negative equity for a couple of months. But otherwise prices have done what the fuckers from foxtons always say they will. 

But it is nuts now.  It's what's fuelling the so-called growth in the economy, people with property imagine they're rich and spend more.  But it's the same old smack that's numbed us to the  truth about the British economy since it was dismantled in the 1980s.  Four clucking years of Osborne and instead of getting clean we're back on the shit. This isn't a recovery it's a relapse.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 23, 2014)

Winot said:


> It's pretty much just a London bubble though, isn't it? And one that is inflated by those who have not been affected by the recession.



It's probably at its worst in London (although I suspect folk in the West Country might argue the toss), but the bubble is inflating just about anywhere within a 2 hour commuting distance of London, which is a pretty wide circle that goes way beyond the traditional image of the Home Counties as the farthest reach of London's dormitories.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 23, 2014)

fortyplus said:


> If I had a penny for every time I've heard similar sentiments about London property prices since forever, I'd be rich.... Every time I've agreed and thought, this time people will see sense. Briefly, in the early 90s,  when Lamont burst the Lawson bubble caused by the removal of multiple mortgage interest tax relief, we did have some falling property prices and a few people might have been in negative equity for a couple of months. But otherwise prices have done what the fuckers from foxtons always say they will.



I was saying elsewhere on the board a few days ago, that in terms of the bursting of the London house price bubble, the worst that's happened in my lifetime is around a 20% drop ('92 or '93, I think).  Most other events have been a 10% or less drop, or simply just a plateau, where prices have stagnated for at most a year.



> But it is nuts now.  It's what's fuelling the so-called growth in the economy, people with property imagine they're rich and spend more.  But it's the same old smack that's numbed us to the  truth about the British economy since it was dismantled in the 1980s.  Four clucking years of Osborne and instead of getting clean we're back on the shit. This isn't a recovery it's a relapse.



Well, house price inflation is *part* of what's fueling growth.  The other significant component is non-mortgage personal debt.  Not production of anything, just debt.


----------



## leanderman (Jan 23, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> The worst that's happened in my lifetime is around a 20% drop ('92 or '93, I think).  Most other events have been a 10% or less drop, or simply just a plateau, where prices have stagnated for at most a year.



Prices dropped 25 per cent in London at the height of the financial meltdown in 2008/9.

But this situation lasted only a few months, before being reversed by ultra low interest rates.

My sister-in-law was lucky enough to buy in this sweet spot.


----------



## editor (Jan 25, 2014)

I see those scumbags at Foxtons have taken to nailing up their For Sale signs on the public footpath outside the Barrier Block.

The earlier storm had already half knocked it over so it was blocking the path for residents, and I can only assume that a later gust must have pulled it completely free from its fastenings and sent it flying right into the dustbin area.


----------



## cuppa tee (Jan 25, 2014)

editor said:


> I see those scumbags at Foxtons have taken to nailing up their For Sale signs on the public footpath outside the Barrier Block.
> 
> The earlier storm had already half knocked it over so it was blocking the path for residents, and I can only assume that a later gust must have pulled it completely free from its fastenings and sent it flying right into the dustbin area.
> 
> View attachment 47207


that mini hurricane also took out a large section of hoarding around the oval quarter development, it's currently lying across the road, looks like it was weighted down at the back with about 30 paving slabs too


----------



## BigMoaner (Jan 26, 2014)

leanderman said:


> WHAT IS GOING ON?




our flat has doubled in price in 6 years.

i've had a few estate agents tell me that the "market is at reaching its peak" now, though. although i honestly now, after months of dealing with them, can't believe a word they say.


----------



## uk benzo (Feb 4, 2014)

2 bedroom property for 700k. Fucking crazy and more importantly disgusting.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Feb 4, 2014)

Heh.


----------



## ash (Feb 4, 2014)

Flat for sale here for £750,000

http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/31785189


----------



## leanderman (Feb 4, 2014)

ash said:


> Flat for sale here for £750,000
> 
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/31785189



£690 per sq ft. bonkers


----------



## Smick (Feb 4, 2014)

uk benzo said:


> 2 bedroom property for 700k. Fucking crazy and more importantly disgusting.


 
I think I'd like that location; close to the park, pubs, train station. I still wouldn't pay that money though (not that I have it)


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Feb 4, 2014)

bah


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Feb 4, 2014)

ash said:


> Flat for sale here for £750,000
> 
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/31785189



I'd want the whole house for that asking price and the one next door.


----------



## Davo84 (Feb 6, 2014)

I keep getting constantly letters in the post for renting out my flat. Having a look at zoopla the rent would be 50% higher than the mortgage, (but then I would have to find a place to live). That's madness!


----------



## shifting gears (Feb 6, 2014)

Davo84 said:


> I keep getting constantly letters in the post for renting out my flat. Having a look at zoopla the rent would be 50% higher than the mortgage, (but then I would have to find a place to live). That's madness!



Phone their head office. If the letters are sent to an unspecified person (ie to 'the homeowner') , give them your address, tell them you own the property (even if you're just renting), and that you wish to be immediately removed from their mailing list. If they ask for your name, refuse to give it - tell them the mail was unsolicited and you do not wish your name to be on their records. Once they've said they're sorting it, hang up without saying thank you. 

Worked for me.


----------



## Rushy (Feb 6, 2014)

900K Brixton Hill flat with bedrooms opening directly off the living room, anyone?

Or 760K for one with a windowless living room?


----------



## Rushy (Feb 6, 2014)

Rushy said:


> 900K Brixton Hill flat with bedrooms opening directly off the living room, anyone?
> 
> Or 760K for one with a windowless living room?



Sorry - make that 995K.


----------



## Chilavert (Feb 6, 2014)

Friends of a friend used to rent the flat that was on top of the printworks on Brixton; apparently it was a lovely big three-bedroom place.

The developers are obviously squeezing as many bedrooms in as they can now.

Edit: I'm intrigued by the 'bulk buy' option on the Foxtons website...


----------



## Rushy (Feb 6, 2014)

Chilavert said:


> Friends of a friend used to rent the flat that was on top of the printworks on Brixton; apparently it was a lovely big three-bedroom place.
> 
> The developers are obviously squeezing as many bedrooms in as they can now.


To be fair - they don't look squeezed. They are still huge flats. The layouts are just a bit - meh - for a nigh on million squid.


----------



## shifting gears (Feb 6, 2014)

Chilavert said:


> Friends of a friend used to rent the flat that was on top of the printworks on Brixton; apparently it was a lovely big three-bedroom place.



Went to a cracking house party in that flat a few years back - great place to live, huge flat with big old roof terrace too


----------



## editor (Feb 7, 2014)

With thanks to a certain urban poster. 







http://www.brixtonbuzz.com/2014/02/...ctive-planter-from-foxtons-estate-agent-sign/


----------



## editor (Feb 7, 2014)

The fucking fuckers have nailed another of their shitty signs on council property.


----------



## fjydj (Feb 7, 2014)

leanderman said:


> School cashment.
> 
> But there is no sign of this madness ending.
> 
> Imagine what you could buy outside London for £650,000 - instead of this two-bed flat in Brixton.



price drop to £625,000: http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/31713328?search_identifier=5ac30f2e7d809ee52aa92ca0655f0f47
that flat is awful, the windows are right on the street and are totally rotten and bodged full of filler

is it even in sudbourne school catchment area at that end of the road?


----------



## editor (Feb 9, 2014)

Must have exceptionally windy last night.


----------



## Manter (Feb 9, 2014)

Rushy said:


> 900K Brixton Hill flat with bedrooms opening directly off the living room, anyone?
> 
> Or 760K for one with a windowless living room?


That first one is a remarkably ugly building

And the second with its double bedroom boast.... Those rooms are only double rooms in as much as they are the size of a double bed!


----------



## BigMoaner (Feb 10, 2014)

ash said:


> Flat for sale here for £750,000
> 
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/31785189


it's actually a bit sickening, really. 

i honestly don't know how prices can get any higher?


----------



## CH1 (Feb 10, 2014)

BigMoaner said:


> it's actually a bit sickening, really.
> 
> i honestly don't know how prices can get any higher?


Check Janet Yellen. If she continues to allow US interest rates to rise, they will rise here too (or mega food/petrol inflation). That will stop it.


----------



## Smick (Feb 10, 2014)

CH1 said:


> Check Janet Yellen. If she continues to allow US interest rates to rise, they will rise here too (or mega food/petrol inflation). That will stop it.


 
And if people are borrowed to the hilt, rates go up, mortgages go up, they have to sell, supply increases and prices go down.

That might not impact the speculators much though.


----------



## BigMoaner (Feb 10, 2014)

i wouldn't buy it. put interest rates up and that'll slow it down and places like that i would think might even go down in price. there's so much more out there. you can buy a fucking beautiful mansion in thornton heath or south norwood for that which is only 13 mins on the rattler from central london.


----------



## CH1 (Feb 10, 2014)

Smick said:


> That might not impact the speculators much though.


How come Oval Quarter is advertised on the Brixton tube escalator? Are they running out of takers from their Kuala Lumpar/Hong Kong/Singapore roadshows? Or are the ads for desperate shared ownership punters?


----------



## leanderman (Feb 10, 2014)

CH1 said:


> Check Janet Yellen. If she continues to allow US interest rates to rise, they will rise here too (or mega food/petrol inflation). That will stop it.



Doubt it will make much difference - and rates will rise only very slowly. 

London house prices/rents will still be underpinned by 

Exceptional population growth
Tax breaks for landlords 
City bonuses
Foreign money
Lack of building
Britain's london-centrism

Etc etc


----------



## CH1 (Feb 10, 2014)

Was underpinned by housing benefit to landlords not on your list?


----------



## leanderman (Feb 10, 2014)

CH1 said:


> Was underpinned by housing benefit to landlords not on your list?



I am sure there are even more:

Lack of a land tax on vacant sites


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Feb 10, 2014)

Build a million council homes. Put people back to work. Increasing the tax base.
Permit local authorities to levy a property tax specifically for house building.
Have a windfall tax on all domestic and commercial capital gains of landlords over the last 10 years. Put the revenues into house building.
Abolish "Right To Buy" and "Help To Buy".
Compulsory purchase of "Buy To Let" properties by the state at their original market value.
Abolish commercial landlordism.
Stop blaming foreigners for the shortcomings of the free market.
Stop seeing the housing crisis as an exclusively middle class issue. The media are particularly guilty of this.

Tinkering with interests rates (impossible anyway) and taxation are market mechanisms when it's the market that is at fault. It's like fiddling while Rome burns and Brixton overheats. The madness of neoliberalism permits mortgages to be cheaper than rents. It's a capitalist cruelty that creates overcrowding, forces people away from neighbourhoods they grew up in, provides little or no provision for the poor and ultimately leaves people homeless. 

If you are homeless and on the streets the same system criminalises you. If you show some initiate and squat an empty building the same sick system criminalises you. The real criminals are those that keep a building empty and land undeveloped to turn a profit on investment.

For as long as i can remember, housing has been the only market where rising prices were greeted with glee. Now that's beginning to change but only because the middle class are beginning to feel the pain the poor have always known. The poor shouldn't look to them for salvation nor their political persecutors who put them in privately run jails having put them out of their homes.


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Feb 10, 2014)

And another thing, why should homeowners get mortgage tax relief? If you believe in the free market pay for your own mortgage. The state should have no business in helping individuals purchase assets for their own enrichment.


----------



## Rushy (Feb 10, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> And another thing, why should homeowners get mortgage tax relief? If you believe in the free market pay for your own mortgage. The state should have no business in helping individuals purchase assets for their own enrichment.


Which tax relief is this?


----------



## leanderman (Feb 10, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> And another thing, why should homeowners get mortgage tax relief? If you believe in the free market pay for your own mortgage. The state should have no business in helping individuals purchase assets for their own enrichment.



Mortgage tax relief was basically scrapped in the 80s and finally removed by Brown


----------



## Rushy (Feb 10, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Mortgage tax relief was basically scrapped in the 80s and finally removed by Brown


Introduced by Labour in 69 and abolished in 88 by Nigel Lawson.


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Feb 10, 2014)

Rushy said:


> Which tax relief is this?



*What is Tax Relief for Mortgage Interest on a Home Loan?*
Tax relief for mortgage interest on a home loan is tax relief given to mortgage holders based on the interest paid on a qualifying mortgage on your home i.e. a new mortgage for a home, a top up loan used for the purposes of developing or improving your home, a separate home improvement loan, a re-mortgage or a consolidation of existing qualifying loans [i.e. loans used for the purchase, repair or improvement of your home], secured on the deeds of the home.
http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/it/leaflets/tax-relief-source-mortgage-interest-relief.html#section1


----------



## TruXta (Feb 10, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> *What is Tax Relief for Mortgage Interest on a Home Loan?*
> Tax relief for mortgage interest on a home loan is tax relief given to mortgage holders based on the interest paid on a qualifying mortgage on your home i.e. a new mortgage for a home, a top up loan used for the purposes of developing or improving your home, a separate home improvement loan, a re-mortgage or a consolidation of existing qualifying loans [i.e. loans used for the purchase, repair or improvement of your home], secured on the deeds of the home.


???

From HMRC



> *Mortgage interest relief - introductory note*
> Relief on mortgage interest repayments was removed on 6 April 2000. Mortgage interest relief for those aged 65 and over who take out loans to buy a life annuity (a home income plan) ended with effect from 9 March 1999, but existing loans will continue to qualify for the remainder of the loan period.


http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/statistics/mortgage.htm


----------



## leanderman (Feb 10, 2014)

Rushy said:


> Introduced by Labour in 69 and abolished in 88 by Nigel Lawson.



Miras was still around under Labour, until 2000


----------



## TruXta (Feb 10, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> *What is Tax Relief for Mortgage Interest on a Home Loan?*
> Tax relief for mortgage interest on a home loan is tax relief given to mortgage holders based on the interest paid on a qualifying mortgage on your home i.e. a new mortgage for a home, a top up loan used for the purposes of developing or improving your home, a separate home improvement loan, a re-mortgage or a consolidation of existing qualifying loans [i.e. loans used for the purchase, repair or improvement of your home], secured on the deeds of the home.


You're quoting the Irish Revenue there, Dexter.


----------



## leanderman (Feb 10, 2014)

The problem is mortgage interest relief for _landlords_.

As I have pointed out here dozens of times


----------



## Rushy (Feb 10, 2014)

The only thing there which is tax deductible is interest on qualifying loans. A qualifying loan is funds which you have borrowed against the value of your home in order to invest in your business, whatever that may be.


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Feb 10, 2014)

TruXta said:


> You're quoting the Irish Revenue there, Dexter.



Fuck


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Feb 10, 2014)

Rushy said:


> The only thing there which is tax deductible is interest on qualifying loans. A qualifying loan is funds which you have borrowed against the value of your home in order to invest in your business, whatever that may be.



Well that should be abolished.


----------



## Rushy (Feb 10, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> Well that should be abolished.



Why should the cost of a business loan not be tax deductible? It is a business cost. Lots of people starting businesses risk their homes by raising capital against them. E.g. a plumber who needs equipment or a van to start out on his own. Or someone trading nuts and bolts (I use that as an example because I know someone who started their business doing this) needs to buy stock.  It's hard enough for businesses to get finance as it is. What you are suggesting would mean small businesses could be paying tax even if they were losing money - making it even harder than it already is to start a bsuiness. Brilliant!


----------



## leanderman (Feb 10, 2014)

Rushy said:


> Why should the cost of a business loan not be tax deductible? It is a business cost. Lots of people starting businesses risk their homes by raising capital against them. E.g. a plumber who needs equipment or a van to start out on his own. Or someone trading nuts and bolts (I use that as an example because I know someone who started their business doing this) needs to buy stock.  It's hard enough for businesses to get finance as it is. What you are suggesting would mean small businesses could be paying tax even if they were losing money - making it even harder than it already is to start a bsuiness. Brilliant!



A business loan is reasonable - but tax breaks on a loan used to speculate on property are something else.

And are a major factor in the rise of buy to let.


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Feb 10, 2014)

Rushy said:


> Why should the cost of a business loan not be tax deductible? It is a business cost. Lots of people starting businesses risk their homes by raising capital against them. E.g. a plumber who needs equipment or a van to start out on his own. Or someone trading nuts and bolts (I use that as an example because I know someone who started their business doing this) needs to buy stock.  It's hard enough for businesses to get finance as it is. What you are suggesting would mean small businesses could be paying tax even if they were losing money - making it even harder than it already is to start a bsuiness. Brilliant!




That's the risk you take in a free market. Another fault of the free market is despite the bailouts, the quantative easing, the casino banks are still not lending. The profits get privatised and the losses externalised. There has to be a better way of doing things. Proponents of neoliberalism would also argue against you saying imperfections in the market are caused by state intervention.


----------



## Manter (Feb 10, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> Well that should be abolished.


It's designed to encourage small businesses- so if I am setting up a little shop or manufacturing firm or whatever, I can secure the loan I need to start up- or expand- against my house. Some people's businesses are property businesses so contributing to the problem, but many people are using/risking their properties to do 'real' things, iyswim.


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Feb 10, 2014)

Manter said:


> It's designed to encourage small businesses- so if I am setting up a little shop or manufacturing firm or whatever, I can secure the loan I need to start up- or expand- against my house. Some people's businesses are property businesses so contributing to the problem, but many people are using/risking their properties to do 'real' things, iyswim.



But the interest is tax deductible and it shouldn't be.


----------



## Rushy (Feb 10, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> But the interest is tax deductible and it shouldn't be.


It is a business cost. Just like renting an office or paying for staff. Why should it not be tax deductible?

What you suggest would give advantage to companies who don't need finance - usually bigger more established companies.


----------



## Manter (Feb 10, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> But the interest is tax deductible and it shouldn't be.


Why not? It's to encourage people to do it- so rather than sitting on a house as a dead asset, you use it to provide jobs and get money into the economy?


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Feb 10, 2014)

Rushy said:


> It is a business cost. Just like renting an office or paying for staff. Why should it not be tax deductible?
> 
> What you suggest would give advantage to companies who don't need finance - usually bigger more established companies.



Why should the taxpayer pay for business costs?


----------



## Rushy (Feb 10, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> Why should the taxpayer pay for business costs?


How so? What you are suggesting is making people pay tax on income they have not earned.


----------



## fortyplus (Feb 10, 2014)

Rushy said:


> Introduced by Labour in 69 and abolished in 88 by Nigel Lawson.


? surely retained by Maudling when he abolished Schedule A tax on imputed rental income for owner-occupiers?


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Feb 10, 2014)

Rushy said:


> How so? What you are suggesting is making people pay tax on income they have not earned.



I'm not suggesting that at all.


----------



## Manter (Feb 10, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> Why should the taxpayer pay for business costs?


Because small businesses are critical to the economy* and the aim is to encourage growth, to increase the tax base longer term. If I expand my business (er, my imaginary business) and hire two more employees, that's two more sets of tax, they buy stuff etc etc. 

I really don't think it's am issue tbh and I'd be v cautious about doing something that hammered small businesses- the tax issues around big businesses are much more critical 


*This says 95% of uk employees are in small or medium sized enterprises https://www.kent.ac.uk/careers/sme.htm ....


----------



## Rushy (Feb 10, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> I'm not suggesting that at all.


Sorry fella but that is exactly what you are proposing.
If tax relief was available on loan capital repayments as well as on the interest then yes, the tax payer would be forking out. But it's not.


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Feb 10, 2014)

Manter said:


> Because small businesses are critical to the economy* and the aim is to encourage growth, to increase the tax base longer term. If I expand my business (er, my imaginary business) and hire two more employees, that's two more sets of tax, they buy stuff etc etc.
> 
> I really don't think it's am issue tbh and I'd be v cautious about doing something that hammered small businesses- the tax issues around big businesses are much more critical
> 
> ...




This is one of the problems of having this kind of discussion.
It's always about growth, GDP, GNP, rates of return, investment opportunities, risk and reward, creating a suitable business environment.
It's impossible to have a rational discussion about this because the arguments are imprisoned in a neoliberal mindset That's what thirty years of Thatcherism has achieved. Free market proponents contradict themselves just as neoliberalism contradicts itself.

I'm arguing for another way of living that isn't centred around the profit motive where the production, allocation and management of resources like housing are not left to the free market.


----------



## Rushy (Feb 10, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> This is one of the problems of having this kind of discussion.
> It's always about growth, GDP, GNP, rates of return, investment opportunities, risk and reward, creating a suitable business environment.
> It's impossible to have a rational discussion about this because the arguments are imprisoned in a neoliberal mindset That's what thirty years of Thatcherism has achieved. Free market proponents contradict themselves just as neoliberalism contradicts itself.
> 
> I'm arguing for another way of living that isn't centred around the profit motive where the production, allocation and management of resources like housing are not left to the free market.



Well proposing a tax tweak the main effect of which would be to stop small businesses from offsetting all their genuine costs against their income is probably not the most obvious place to start.


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Feb 10, 2014)

Rushy said:


> Sorry fella but that is exactly what you are proposing.
> If tax relief was available on loan capital repayments as well as on the interest then yes, the tax payer would be forking out. But it's not.



If a mortgage payer can get tax relief on the interest that mortgage attracts then surely that is a taxpayers subsidy?


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Feb 10, 2014)

Rushy said:


> Well proposing a tax tweak the main effect of which would be to stop small businesses from offsetting all their genuine costs against their income is probably not the most obvious place to start.



Well i've made lots of other proposals as well but they have been ignored.


----------



## Rushy (Feb 10, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> If a mortgage payer can get tax relief on the interest that mortgage attracts then surely that is a taxpayers subsidy?


I'm listening. Why is being allowed to offset the cost of a business loan against your businesses income a subsidy?


----------



## Rushy (Feb 10, 2014)

fortyplus said:


> ? surely retained by Maudling when he abolished Schedule A tax on imputed rental income for owner-occupiers?


Fuck - I don't know.  All I know is that I didn't qualify for MIRAS when I got my first mortgage in 96.


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Feb 10, 2014)

Rushy said:


> I'm listening. Why is being allowed to offset the cost of a business loan against your businesses income a subsidy?



You are conflating two issues into one argument and i've answered.


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Feb 10, 2014)

There is an interesting article just published here;
Overseas property buyers are not the problem: landlord subsidies are
To stop the market overheating, we must end tax incentives for buyers, improve tenants' rights and make better use of our stock
http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...property-london-landlord-subsidies?CMP=twt_gu


----------



## leanderman (Feb 10, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> There is an interesting article just published here;
> Overseas property buyers are not the problem: landlord subsidies are
> To stop the market overheating, we must end tax incentives for buyers, improve tenants' rights and make better use of our stock
> http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...property-london-landlord-subsidies?CMP=twt_gu



Absolutely.

But not going to happen - MPs own multiple homes and the economy is addicted to housing


----------



## Rushy (Feb 10, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> You are conflating two issues into one argument and i've answered.


Err... ok?


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Feb 10, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Absolutely.
> 
> But not going to happen - MPs own multiple homes and the economy is addicted to housing



More importantly it destroys the lie that the private sector is more efficient than the public sector.

_There are an estimated 15m empty bedrooms in owner occupied properties in England. In this sector, around half of all bedrooms are not slept in each night, compared with 10% amongst social renters and 16% for private renters. Even within inner London, there are more bedrooms than people; the number of unused properties in the heart of the capital is growing each year._


----------



## passivejoe (Feb 10, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> More importantly it destroys the lie that the private sector is more efficient than the public sector.
> 
> _There are an estimated 15m empty bedrooms in owner occupied properties in England. In this sector, around half of all bedrooms are not slept in each night, compared with 10% amongst social renters and 16% for private renters. Even within inner London, there are more bedrooms than people; the number of unused properties in the heart of the capital is growing each year._



A certain % of unused bedrooms is understandable... parents don't always want to move to a smaller house the moment their kids fly the nest; people have spare rooms for friends and relatives to stay; bedrooms that double as a home office etc etc. I just don't know what % of empty bedrooms I would expect in the UK. 

How many bedrooms are there in the UK so that we have a comparison figure for the 15m?


----------



## leanderman (Feb 10, 2014)

A mansion in Helix Gardens off Brixton Hill is being taken apart in an endless restoration project for a Swiss banker, who has so much money he has bought a 'modest' five-bedroom house next door to live in in the meantime.

I guess the latter will be used as staff quarters when they move in to the mansion!


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Feb 10, 2014)

passivejoe said:


> A certain % of unused bedrooms is understandable... parents don't always want to move to a smaller house the moment their kids fly the nest; people have spare rooms for friends and relatives to stay; bedrooms that double as a home office etc etc. I just don't know what % of empty bedrooms I would expect in the UK.
> 
> How many bedrooms are there in the UK so that we have a comparison figure for the 15m?



A certain percentage of unused bedrooms is also understandable in social housing, a partner with a disability, less mobility (social, economic) to move amongst the poor is also a factor  etc and the same reasons you quote above.
The total number does not matter the comparison does; 49% of bedrooms in owner occupied properties in England are empty versus 10% in social housing.

I'd also be interested in some statistics to show the state of overcrowding in social housing and how that compares to the private sector.


----------



## leanderman (Feb 10, 2014)

The only consolation being that social housing is usually cheaper, or it is in this road anyway.


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Feb 10, 2014)

leanderman said:


> The only consolation being that social housing is usually cheaper, or it is in this road anyway.



Indeed but it ought to be.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 10, 2014)

look what you can get for £200k in the wilds of Wales 





http://noddfachapelforsale.weebly.com/

and their offering £1000 to someone who helps them sell it!
not many pics mind


----------



## ddraig (Feb 10, 2014)

how much would that be in Brixxers?


----------



## Belushi (Feb 10, 2014)

Lovely but isolated. Jobs are hard to come by round there so you'd likely have to be someone who can work from home, or be retired.

And it rains. A lot


----------



## Belushi (Feb 10, 2014)

ddraig said:


> how much would that be in Brixxers?



A million?


----------



## ddraig (Feb 10, 2014)

Belushi said:


> Lovely but isolated. Jobs are hard to come by round there so you'd likely have to be someone who can work from home, or be retired.
> 
> And it rains. A lot


oh ai
not tooo baaaad between Mach and Dolgellau and Aber!


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Feb 11, 2014)

They must be having trouble shifting it if they want randoms on the internet to do their marketing for them. There is no way i would live in a church.


----------



## passivejoe (Feb 11, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> A certain percentage of unused bedrooms is also understandable in social housing, a partner with a disability, less mobility (social, economic) to move amongst the poor is also a factor  etc and the same reasons you quote above.
> The total number does not matter the comparison does; 49% of bedrooms in owner occupied properties in England are empty versus 10% in social housing.
> 
> I'd also be interested in some statistics to show the state of overcrowding in social housing and how that compares to the private sector.



49%? Jesus, that's a lot. Surely there must be a lot of pensioners rattling around in empty family homes to skew those figures. It would actually be interesting to see how the 49% breaks down by demographic.  Where are you getting the numbers from?


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Feb 11, 2014)

passivejoe said:


> 49%? Jesus, that's a lot. Surely there must be a lot of pensioners rattling around in empty family homes to skew those figures. It would actually be interesting to see how the 49% breaks down by demographic.  Where are you getting the numbers from?



The statistics come from the Guardian article and the pages the article links to.


----------



## leanderman (Feb 11, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> The statistics come from the Guardian article and the pages the article links to.



Yes. Longer life spans etc. 

R4 programme with economist Andrew Dilnot pointed out that, a hundred years ago, 5pc of people lived alone and now it's 30pc or so.


----------



## editor (Feb 11, 2014)

Ex council flat on the Moorlands Estate going for _£375,000_.
http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?property_id=879398&search_form=map&search_type=SS&submit_type=search

Edit: that's actually in my block.


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Feb 11, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Yes. Longer life spans etc.
> 
> R4 programme with economist Andrew Dilnot pointed out that, a hundred years ago, 5pc of people lived alone and now it's 30pc or so.



Yep, single occupancy households is a trend, i was ahead of the curve on that one!


----------



## Rushy (Feb 11, 2014)

ddraig said:


> look what you can get for £200k in the wilds of Wales
> 
> http://noddfachapelforsale.weebly.com/
> 
> ...



Or for the same price by the sea in nearbyish Borth you can pick up a 4 bed house with a huge chapel in the garden. It's not quite waterfront - but might soon be...


----------



## Rushy (Feb 11, 2014)

editor said:


> Ex council flat on the Moorlands Estate going for _£375,000_.
> http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?property_id=879398&search_form=map&search_type=SS&submit_type=search
> 
> Edit: that's actually in my block.


Similar with a garage and garden was 250 last year.


----------



## Rushy (Feb 11, 2014)

leanderman said:


> A mansion in Helix Gardens off Brixton Hill is being taken apart in an endless restoration project for a Swiss banker, who has so much money he has bought a 'modest' five-bedroom house next door to live in in the meantime.
> 
> I guess the latter will be used as staff quarters when they move in to the mansion!


What mansions are these? The three storey terraces? They're about 180sqm unextended. Many of the two storey houses on the long terraces nearby are about 140-145sqm even before extending into the loft and a rear extension which can take them over 180sqm. 

Does it become a mansion when a Swiss banker moves in?


----------



## Manter (Feb 11, 2014)

Rushy said:


> Or for the same price by the sea in nearbyish Borth you can pick up a 4 bed house with a huge chapel in the garden. It's not quite waterfront - but might soon be...


The wording in there makes me think you won't get planning easily for change of use. Amazing chapel though. The house.... Not so much


----------



## Rushy (Feb 11, 2014)

Manter said:


> The wording in there makes me think you won't get planning easily for change of use. Amazing chapel though. The house.... Not so much


Fairly standard on those old Methodist chapels. That covenant would not stop conversion to a house. Unless perhaps you were intending to be a particularly immoral occupant! The cost of conversion would be a far greater obstacle to change of use.


----------



## leanderman (Feb 11, 2014)

Rushy said:


> What mansions are these? The three storey terraces? They're about 180sqm unextended. Many of the two storey houses on the long terraces nearby are about 140-145sqm even before extending into the loft and a rear extension which can take them over 180sqm.
> 
> Does it become a mansion when a Swiss banker moves in?



It's a mansion because it is an imposing double-fronter at end of short terrace on the Brixton Hill side. Number 4, I think.

You should take a look. The most calamitous building project I have seen.


----------



## Rushy (Feb 11, 2014)

leanderman said:


> It's a mansion because it is an imposing double-fronter at end of short terrace on the Brixton Hill side. Number 4, I think.
> 
> You should take a look. The most calamitous building project I have seen.


You're thinking of Num 2. It's a bit bigger again but is a funny shape as one side of the house is wrapped around a neighbours garden and consequently only one room deep.
They have been given permission to excavate a new basement under the front garden - as well as various other things.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 11, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> And another thing, why should homeowners get mortgage tax relief? If you believe in the free market pay for your own mortgage. The state should have no business in helping individuals purchase assets for their own enrichment.



MIRAS is long gone.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 11, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> Build a million council homes. Put people back to work. Increasing the tax base.
> Permit local authorities to levy a property tax specifically for house building.
> Have a windfall tax on all domestic and commercial capital gains of landlords over the last 10 years. Put the revenues into house building.



Unfortunately, that'd be nigh-on impossible to carry out, even with the necessary legislation, as some of that money would have been lost on bad investments etc, which would give the interested parties something to piss and moan about for the next 100 years or so.



> Abolish "Right To Buy" and "Help To Buy".



Both would be *necessary* if the needed volume of social and private housing is to be achieved (HtB because it uses money that could fund building _per se_ to delivber profits to developers).



> Compulsory purchase of "Buy To Let" properties by the state at their original market value.
> Abolish commercial landlordism.
> Stop blaming foreigners for the shortcomings of the free market.
> Stop seeing the housing crisis as an exclusively middle class issue. The media are particularly guilty of this.



Because the media is fundamentally a middle and upper class institution.



> Tinkering with interests rates (impossible anyway) and taxation are market mechanisms when it's the market that is at fault. It's like fiddling while Rome burns and Brixton overheats. The madness of neoliberalism permits mortgages to be cheaper than rents. It's a capitalist cruelty that creates overcrowding, forces people away from neighbourhoods they grew up in, provides little or no provision for the poor and ultimately leaves people homeless.



TBF, even prior to neoliberalism, mortgage was often cheaper than rent.  What neoliberalism has done is make it more or less socially-acceptable to exploit without opprobrium, and to brush off the consequences.  People like us, who rail against the _rentiers_, we're a minority (although a growing one).



> If you are homeless and on the streets the same system criminalises you. If you show some initiate and squat an empty building the same sick system criminalises you. The real criminals are those that keep a building empty and land undeveloped to turn a profit on investment.



This has been the case for as long as we've had "private property".  Nowadays, it's merely more baldly exploitative and "couldn't give a shit".



> For as long as i can remember, housing has been the only market where rising prices were greeted with glee. Now that's beginning to change but only because the middle class are beginning to feel the pain the poor have always known. The poor shouldn't look to them for salvation nor their political persecutors who put them in privately run jails having put them out of their homes.



Glee at rising prices has always struck me as inane. Why celebrate the fact that your property's value has increased, when the value of any property you might want to "trade up" to, will also have increased?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 11, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> *What is Tax Relief for Mortgage Interest on a Home Loan?*
> Tax relief for mortgage interest on a home loan is tax relief given to mortgage holders based on the interest paid on a qualifying mortgage on your home i.e. a new mortgage for a home, a top up loan used for the purposes of developing or improving your home, a separate home improvement loan, a re-mortgage or a consolidation of existing qualifying loans [i.e. loans used for the purchase, repair or improvement of your home], secured on the deeds of the home.
> http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/it/leaflets/tax-relief-source-mortgage-interest-relief.html#section1



Your link is Irish.


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Feb 11, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> Your link is Irish.



I know that now


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 11, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> Why should the taxpayer pay for business costs?



Because in some cases, those businesses will be socially-beneficial (providing local jobs and local services).
What I would say, is that there should be a clear differentiation between tax tweaks for property-based businesses (i.e. none!), and businesses that do provide a social benefit.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 11, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> I know that now



I just thought I'd rub it in.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 11, 2014)

Manter said:


> Because small businesses are critical to the economy* and the aim is to encourage growth, to increase the tax base longer term. If I expand my business (er, my imaginary business) and hire two more employees, that's two more sets of tax, they buy stuff etc etc.



the problem being that there's no extant structures w/r/t taxation that differentiate between the type of businesses you mention, and what they accomplish in and for a local economy, and the sort of small businesses (property agencies and letting agencies, for example) that may extract more from a local economy than they contribute.



> I really don't think it's am issue tbh and I'd be v cautious about doing something that hammered small businesses- the tax issues around big businesses are much more critical



Agreed. local Chambers of Commerce have been complaining for at least 50 years about the different regimes enforced on SMEs (pay up or face liquidation) and "big business" (please let us reach an accommodation with you). 



> *This says 95% of uk employees are in small or medium sized enterprises https://www.kent.ac.uk/careers/sme.htm ....



And yet HMRC obviously prefer the taste of the black worm jism of big business, than that of the 95% of business taxpayers.


----------



## Manter (Feb 11, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> the problem being that there's no extant structures w/r/t taxation that differentiate between the type of businesses you mention, and what they accomplish in and for a local economy, and the sort of small businesses (property agencies and letting agencies, for example) that may extract more from a local economy than they contribute.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Agree with you, it'd be ideal if there was a differentiation between different types of businesses. No idea at all how you do that though


----------



## leanderman (Feb 11, 2014)

Rushy said:


> You're thinking of Num 2. It's a bit bigger again but is a funny shape as one side of the house is wrapped around a neighbours garden and consequently only one room deep.
> They have been given permission to excavate a new basement under the front garden - as well as various other things.



Yes. I noticed that from inspecting their plans for a wine cellar


----------



## passivejoe (Feb 11, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Yes. I noticed that from inspecting their plans for a wine cellar



The Swiss banker seems like quite a nice guy though. Stopped to talk to him a few times. 

But the project does look like a disaster. According to the builders, there were supposed to be finished by April. Makes me laugh that, almost 1 year on, it has no roof, many missing walls etc and will most likely end up just looking like a victorian terrace again.


----------



## Rushy (Feb 11, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Yes. I noticed that from inspecting their plans for a wine cellar



What a wonderfully populist soundbite!


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Feb 11, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Yes. I noticed that from inspecting their plans for a wine cellar




Looks like those builders are coming after you, on your toes lad. I suspect they will never catch you.


----------



## Winot (Feb 11, 2014)

Rushy said:


> What a wonderfully populist soundbite!



The people are thirsty? Let them drink wine!


----------



## Rushy (Feb 11, 2014)

Winot said:


> The people are thirsty? Let them drink wine!


----------



## leanderman (Feb 11, 2014)

passivejoe said:


> The Swiss banker seems like quite a nice guy though. Stopped to talk to him a few times.
> 
> But the project does look like a disaster. According to the builders, there were supposed to be finished by April. Makes me laugh that, almost 1 year on, it has no roof, many missing walls etc and will most likely end up just looking like a victorian terrace again.



It really is amazing how long it has taken. But the simpler task, restoring their nearby end-terrace home, took ages too.

Not sure I would use their builder.


----------



## Rushy (Feb 11, 2014)

leanderman said:


> It really is amazing how long it has taken. But the simpler task, restoring their nearby end-terrace home, took ages too.
> 
> Not sure I would use their builder.


I have no idea about those guys but there are a lot of seriously incompetent builders about. If you don't know how to run a building project it is very easy to get burned. Most people want to pay the lowest price and there are a lot of tradesmen who frankly do not give two shits about the quality of their work /reputation so are happy to be bartered down and abandon the project when it suits.  

I have often told friends that the building quotes they have been given are too low but they take them anyway. And then have to get builders in again.
Last year a friend in East Dulwich accepted a quote for an extension from a N Irish guy which was way too low. She is N Irish herself and assured me that she trusted him - they had some sort of understanding. So he did all the structural, built the walls - slowly - and then it came to putting the roof on he said that wasn't included in the price. The house was wide open and she was late months pregnant so paid him extra. He put the roof on but never properly finished the job.


----------



## Smick (Feb 11, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> Your link is Irish.


 
In Republic of Ireland there is also tax relief for people paying rent.

It's quite a strange system where the rate of tax against your income seems quite high but you can claim lots back or buy things like train tickets from your gross income.

I'm not sure which system I'd prefer.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 11, 2014)

Manter said:


> Agree with you, it'd be ideal if there was a differentiation between different types of businesses. No idea at all how you do that though


hmrc already do that based on your turnover.


----------



## passivejoe (Feb 18, 2014)

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-44938850.html

3.5 bedrooms, 1 bathroom.... £1.2m????


----------



## Manter (Feb 18, 2014)

sleaterkinney said:


> hmrc already do that based on your turnover.


I meant type of business- manufacturing vs services etc


----------



## Manter (Feb 18, 2014)

passivejoe said:


> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-44938850.html
> 
> 3.5 bedrooms, 1 bathroom.... £1.2m????


I can kind of see that one. It's ridiculous, because London prices are, but it's got a garden, original features, it's close to Brixton, unconverted loft so expansion potential, and they're attractive houses down there.

Mind you, they were about £550k only 2 years ago...


----------



## editor (Feb 18, 2014)

Manter said:


> I can kind of see that one. It's ridiculous, because London prices are, but it's got a garden, original features, it's close to Brixton, unconverted loft so expansion potential, and they're attractive houses down there.
> 
> Mind you, they were about £550k only 2 years ago...


It's also tiny.


----------



## Manter (Feb 18, 2014)

editor said:


> It's also tiny.


True. I didn't look at the dimensions. Oops

Bet they get the price they want though


----------



## Rushy (Feb 18, 2014)

Manter said:


> True. I didn't look at the dimensions. Oops
> 
> Bet they get the price they want though


I truly doubt it.


----------



## fjydj (Feb 21, 2014)

passivejoe said:


> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-44938850.html
> 
> 3.5 bedrooms, 1 bathroom.... £1.2m????



and its not even on with Foxtons 
£960 per sq ft  is crazy even at foxtons prices that should "only" be 800 - 900
we've just sold a flat on sudbourne road at what I thought was a crazy price but which equates to £650 per sq ft (and buying a house at £375 per sq ft )


----------



## Rushy (Feb 21, 2014)

fjydj said:


> and its not even on with Foxtons
> £960 per sq ft  is crazy even at foxtons prices that should "only" be 800 - 900
> we've just sold a flat on sudbourne road at what I thought was a crazy price but which equates to £650 per sq ft (and buying a house at £375 per sq ft )


My ex's fairly average 2 bed flat - no garden - is under offer at over 900/sft just around the corner from Sudbourne. And there were several offers at that price.


----------



## fjydj (Feb 21, 2014)

Heres what £1.2 million between the commons gets you:

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-29349471.html

looks good value compared to that Bleinham gardens one, crazy


----------



## leanderman (Feb 22, 2014)

Rushy said:


> My ex's fairly average 2 bed flat - no garden - is under offer at over 900/sft just around the corner from Sudbourne. And there were several offers at that price.



The new secondary school could further fuel prices in the Sudbourne area.


----------



## Rushy (Feb 22, 2014)

leanderman said:


> The new secondary school could further fuel prices in the Sudbourne area.


It's not even in the catchment.


----------



## Rushy (Feb 22, 2014)

leanderman said:


> The new secondary school could further fuel prices in the Sudbourne area.


The planning application went in for this last week.


----------



## leanderman (Feb 22, 2014)

Rushy said:


> It's not even in the catchment.



It will be when intake doubles 45 to 90, probably from September. Smart buyers are probably aware of this. 

Here's another one:


----------



## Rushy (Feb 22, 2014)

leanderman said:


> It will be when intake doubles 45 to 90, probably from September. Smart buyers are probably aware of this.
> 
> Here's another one:



You're forgetting the new flats at Olive Morris and nearby - that'll soak up a few places.


----------



## leanderman (Feb 22, 2014)

Rushy said:


> You're forgetting the new flats at Olive Morris and nearby - that'll soak up a few places.



Yes. Like the ones across the road, they'll be targeted by 'aspirational' parents.


----------



## leanderman (Feb 22, 2014)

FT front page today expands on their new favourite theme of how only the uber-middle can afford London now - with cling-on professionals being forced out ... to Redbridge. 

Depressing how salaries of academics etc have fallen so far behind those of lawyers and bankers etc


----------



## Rushy (Feb 22, 2014)

leanderman said:


> FT front page today expands on their new favourite theme of how only the uber-middle can afford London now - with cling-on professionals being forced out ... to Redbridge.
> 
> Depressing how salaries of academics etc have fallen so far behind those of lawyers and bankers etc


Academic salaries are derisory in the UK.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 22, 2014)

fjydj said:


> Heres what £1.2 million between the commons gets you:
> 
> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-29349471.html
> 
> looks good value compared to that Bleinham gardens one, crazy



"Between the commons"!!! Muncaster Rd is "verging on Clapham Common"!


----------



## RoyReed (Feb 23, 2014)

Defaced (improved) Foxton's sign.


----------



## editor (Feb 23, 2014)

RoyReed said:


> View attachment 49050
> Defaced (improved) Foxton's sign.


Is that your pic? Where was it taken? I like it very much indeed


----------



## RoyReed (Feb 23, 2014)

editor said:


> Is that your pic? Where was it taken? I like it very much indeed


Yes, my photo, taken this morning - Edgeley Road, Clapham North


----------



## Cowley (Feb 24, 2014)

Over half a million quid for a 1 bedroom flat?

I know it's Foxtons but...

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-44676566.html

Also...the one below, you don't even get a separate kitchen diner?!!! These prices are bonkers!

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-43030537.html

Who is buying this shit? 500k for a third or sometimes a quarter of a House?!!!


----------



## leanderman (Feb 24, 2014)

Cowley said:


> Over half a million quid for a 1 bedroom flat?
> 
> I know it's Foxtons but...
> 
> ...



Sudbourne catchment, which makes sense for larger properties but not for one-bedroom flats.


----------



## leanderman (Feb 24, 2014)

Cowley said:


> Over half a million quid for a 1 bedroom flat?
> 
> I know it's Foxtons but...
> 
> ...



Second one is horrific. A small rabbit warren basically.

I went in it four years ago when it was quite a mess - and it now looks like it has been developed.


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Feb 24, 2014)

Cowley said:


> Over half a million quid for a 1 bedroom flat?
> 
> I know it's Foxtons but...
> 
> ...



Middle class people.


----------



## nagapie (Feb 24, 2014)

Cowley said:


> Who is buying this shit?



Landlords!


----------



## cuppa tee (Feb 24, 2014)

oval quarter has not been fully built yet but people are slowly moving into some blocks
according to Notting Hill Housing market value for a 3 bed flat here is £435,000,
this one ...... http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/32082823 is up thru Foxtons for £599,000 and is in one of the supposedly social/affordable blocks, so thats a theoretical increase of £164,000 in less than three months......


----------



## Manter (Feb 24, 2014)

cuppa tee said:


> oval quarter has not been fully built yet but people are slowly moving into some blocks
> according to Notting Hill Housing market value for a 3 bed flat here is £435,000,
> this one ...... http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/32082823 is up thru Foxtons for £599,000 and is in one of the supposedly social/affordable blocks, so thats a theoretical increase of £164,000 in less than three months......


Kind of irrelevant, but struck by what cheap finishes they've used in that.


----------



## leanderman (Feb 24, 2014)

Manter said:


> Kind of irrelevant, but struck by what cheap finishes they've used in that.



The basin is not very contemporary


----------



## Manter (Feb 24, 2014)

leanderman said:


> The basin is not very contemporary


I noticed the teeny tiny little patch of the cheapest tiles you can buy over it....


----------



## leanderman (Feb 24, 2014)

Manter said:


> I noticed the teeny tiny little patch of the cheapest tiles you can buy over it....



Sparse cupboards in the kitchen. All very mean


----------



## Cowley (Feb 24, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Sudbourne catchment, which makes sense for larger properties but not for one-bedroom flats.



It bloody bonkers, I would have thought you can get a 1 bed in parts of Central London for that price, minus the garden of course.


----------



## Cowley (Feb 24, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Second one is horrific. A small rabbit warren basically.
> 
> I went in it four years ago when it was quite a mess - and it now looks like it has been developed.



Me and the Mrs looked at a 2 Bed Split Level flat on that road in 2004/2005, it was the basement and ground, big old place, you got the garden too. Back then I think it was 230K or something like that, we backed away because we felt it was too expensive!  I dread to think what flats like that sell for now!!!


----------



## Cowley (Feb 24, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> Middle class people.



with more money than sense? 

it's gonna get ugly when prices tumble, no way these prices can stay as is.


----------



## Cowley (Feb 24, 2014)

nagapie said:


> Landlords!



Must be very wealthy landlords.  

Unless you are in a situation where you have no alternative but to invest your "surplus" amounts of wealth into property, I can't for the life of me understand how spending 500K on a 1 bed flat amounts to a good investment. I dunno...maybe I am missing something here.


----------



## Manter (Feb 24, 2014)

Cowley said:


> Me and the Mrs looked at a 2 Bed Split Level flat on that road in 2004/2005, it was the basement and ground, big old place, you got the garden too. Back then I think it was 230K or something like that, we backed away because we felt it was too expensive!  I dread to think what flats like that sell for now!!!


we didn't offer on a couple of things 2 years ago because we thought they were over priced and optimistic (I was quite rude to one of the estate agents).  Now we look very silly as we'd have been quids in


----------



## Smick (Feb 24, 2014)

Back in 2011, I tried railroading estate agents with talk of imminent rate rises, negative consumer sentiment, stamp duty holiday coming to the end, offering 10-15% less than what was on.

I believed it myself but now know it was complete rubbish.


----------



## Manter (Feb 24, 2014)

Somehow glad it wasn't just me….


----------



## Smick (Feb 24, 2014)

Manter said:


> we didn't offer on a couple of things 2 years ago because we thought they were over priced and optimistic (I was quite rude to one of the estate agents).  Now we look very silly as we'd have been quids in


 
You'd be quids in in a property you mightn't be able to leave as everywhere else has gone up hugely and you can't sell as you need somewhere to live. When you die, the government will take the lot in inheritance tax.

The only people who do well are banks, solicitors, estate agents and those with more than one property.


----------



## Manter (Feb 24, 2014)

Smick said:


> You'd be quids in in a property you mightn't be able to leave as everywhere else has gone up hugely and you can't sell as you need somewhere to live. When you die, the government will take the lot in inheritance tax.
> 
> The only people who do well are banks, solicitors, estate agents and those with more than one property.


true.

slightly depressing but true


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Feb 24, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> Middle class people.


Middle class people can't afford that, not even DINKYs. Maybe old middle class people who bought in the 70s or 80s.


----------



## leanderman (Feb 24, 2014)

Smick said:


> You'd be quids in in a property you mightn't be able to leave as everywhere else has gone up hugely and you can't sell as you need somewhere to live. When you die, the government will take the lot in inheritance tax.
> 
> The only people who do well are banks, solicitors, estate agents and those with more than one property.



yes. true

and, at £500k for one-bed, those prices don't add up for landlords - or for school-catchment families, it's weird.


----------



## leanderman (Feb 24, 2014)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Middle class people can't afford that, not even DINKYs. Maybe old middle class people who bought in the 70s or 80s.



I really don't understand it - unless it is money flowing in ahead of the new secondary school.


----------



## Winot (Feb 24, 2014)

Panic. Fear that if they don't buy now, they'll never be able too.


----------



## cuppa tee (Feb 24, 2014)

leanderman said:


> yes. true
> 
> and, at £500k for one-bed, those prices don't add up ....for school-catchment families, it's weird.


buy to let, rent flat out but keep the owners name on the council tax bill so you get kids into the school and a bit of an earner on the side possibly... it's quite common by the Graveney School in Wandsworth so I'm told


----------



## Smick (Feb 24, 2014)

leanderman said:


> yes. true
> 
> and, at £500k for one-bed, those prices don't add up for landlords - or for school-catchment families, it's weird.


 
£500k you'd need £50k in deposit or equity and two people earning £150k between them. And would someone with that sort of cash and income want to live in a one bed flat?


----------



## Manter (Feb 24, 2014)

cuppa tee said:


> buy to let, rent flat out but keep the owners name on the council tax bill so you get kids into the school and a bit of an earner on the side possibly... it's quite common by the Graveney School in Wandsworth so I'm told


don't you need a utility bill as well now?  to cut out that sort of thing?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Feb 24, 2014)

Almost as if there is some sort of bubble that is going to burst because nobody will be able to afford anything beyond older investors and the super-rich.


----------



## cuppa tee (Feb 24, 2014)

Manter said:


> don't you need a utility bill as well now?  to cut out that sort of thing?


no, not for secondary unless it's changed since last year


----------



## leanderman (Feb 24, 2014)

cuppa tee said:


> no, not for secondary unless it's changed since last year



Any attempt to crack down fails. Only parent has been prosecuted - and even the open-and-shut case against her collapsed.


----------



## cuppa tee (Feb 24, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Any attempt to crack down fails. Only parent has been prosecuted - and even the open-and-shut case against her collapsed.


it was pointed out to us during secondary transfer that certain schools actually like those parents who will do a bit extra for their kids....


----------



## leanderman (Feb 24, 2014)

cuppa tee said:


> it was pointed out to us during secondary transfer that certain schools actually like those parents who will do a bit extra for their kids....



Which helps explains why school-run lottery systems are not above suspicion


----------



## Manter (Feb 24, 2014)

cuppa tee said:


> it was pointed out to us during secondary transfer that certain schools actually like those parents who will do a bit extra for their kids....


Jesus…. they should be encouraging parents to spend an extra 20 minutes reading with their little darlings, not to falsify official records.  What sort of example does that send the next generation, FFS?  All this talk of schools needing to provide a moral structure and social education, and the parents are teaching the kids to be devious, self serving shits who lie, scheme and trample on others for the slightest advantage.

ahem.  <<climbs off soapbox>>


----------



## Cowley (Feb 25, 2014)

Manter said:


> we didn't offer on a couple of things 2 years ago because we thought they were over priced and optimistic (I was quite rude to one of the estate agents).  Now we look very silly as we'd have been quids in


 
Lol! I could say the same, the amount of times we have passed up on property only to see it double and in some cases triple in value. We did buy a while back, ended up moving a few times and are now settled in Streatham. We passed up on a few what could be described now as "bargains", didn't want to mortgage ourselves up to the hilt at the time.

Despite all that I honestly can't see how the current prices can stay at their current level, there is only so much money the government can print and interest rates cannot stay as they are forever.  The Economy is still on a Life Support Machine, no two ways about that.

Prices have gotten out of control in London, they are totally detached from reality.


----------



## leanderman (Feb 25, 2014)

Cowley said:


> Lol! I could say the same, the amount of times we have passed up on property only to see it double and in some cases triple in value. We did buy a while back, ended up moving a few times and are now settled in Streatham. We passed up on a few what could be described now as "bargains", didn't want to mortgage ourselves up to the hilt at the time.
> 
> Despite all that I honestly can't see how the current prices can stay at their current level, there is only so much money the government can print and interest rates cannot stay as they are forever.  The Economy is still on a Life Support Machine, no two ways about that.
> 
> Prices have gotten out of control in London, they are totally detached from reality.



I am not sure it will stop: London is now pretty much a global city state, with huge inflows of money and people.


----------



## Cowley (Feb 25, 2014)

leanderman said:


> I am not sure it will stop: London is now pretty much a global city state, with huge inflows of money and people.


 
It has to stop, prices are not reflective of what the average Londoner earns. I am not expecting a crash or for prices to become affordable to everybody, but the cost of a 1 bedroom Flat being on average 9 or 10 times more than the cost of the average London wage?  We are not even talking about prime London areas either, in some cases standard zone 3 areas such as Streatham!

I personally cannot see how this London Housing Market can survive on Foreign investment. The market needs to work from the bottom to the top, not just at the top.

The housing market just like the economy is completely lopsided.


----------



## Manter (Feb 25, 2014)

leanderman said:


> I am not sure it will stop: London is now pretty much a global city state, with huge inflows of money and people.


I was reading somewhere that businesses want the government to address it as it is starting to cause them issues with staff


----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2014)

oh dear "we can't get the staff"
not ones who are awake enough to work hard after travelling to work at 4/5am to clean our ivory towers anyway
it just won't do!


----------



## Manter (Feb 25, 2014)

ddraig said:


> oh dear "we can't get the staff"
> not ones who are awake enough to work hard after travelling to work at 4/5am to clean our ivory towers anyway
> it just won't do!


That's a complete misunderstanding of the point  

Businesses are saying no one can afford to live in London, and no one can afford to move to London. That's not a 'we can't get the staff' snottiness about cleaners or whatever point you're trying to make, it's business leaders going to the government and saying that London's out of control housing market is seriously affecting business which will have long term effects on the economy. It's the sort of intervention that will raise alarms and may actually get something done.?


----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2014)

Manter said:


> That's a complete misunderstanding of the point
> 
> Businesses are saying no one can afford to live in London, and no one can afford to move to London. That's not a 'we can't get the staff' snottiness about cleaners or whatever point you're trying to make, it's business leaders going to the government and saying that London's out of control housing market is seriously affecting business which will have long term effects on the economy. It's the sort of intervention that will raise alarms and may actually get something done.?


so how is it not 'we cant get the staff' again??
ah business leaders, the caring pressure group that will bring some sense and equality to house prices, riiiiight 

some of them realised a bit late that it is affecting some of the people at the lower end of their organisations
maybe their receptionist was late a few times due to living so far out and transport issues and they had to *shudder answer a call themselves or *gasp make their own tea/coffee


----------



## Manter (Feb 25, 2014)

ddraig said:


> so how is it not 'we cant get the staff' again??
> ah business leaders, the caring pressure group that will bring some sense and equality to house prices, riiiiight
> 
> some of them realised a bit late that it is affecting some of the people at the lower end of their organisations
> maybe their receptionist was late a few times due to living so far out and transport issues and they had to *shudder answer a call themselves or *gasp make their own tea/coffee


Your bitterness is clouding your judgement. Businesses are not made up of poor downtrodden workers and evil, cigar chomping fat cats, they are much more complex than that, with many more layers. And I never said it was business leaders being caring, it's about economics. An economic imperative may force government intervention. 

(For the record the vast majority of business leaders I've worked with make their own coffee, and answer their own phone. The business world really doesn't work like an episode of Mad Men anymore)


----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2014)

Manter said:


> Your bitterness is clouding your judgement. Businesses are not made up of poor downtrodden workers and evil, cigar chomping fat cats, they are much more complex than that, with many more layers. And I never said it was business leaders being caring, it's about economics. An economic imperative may force government intervention.
> 
> (For the record the vast majority of business leaders I've worked with make their own coffee, and answer their own phone. The business world really doesn't work like an episode of Mad Men anymore)


my bitterness? wtf
where has that comment come from?


----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2014)

Manter said:


> Your bitterness is clouding your judgement. Businesses are not made up of poor downtrodden workers and evil, cigar chomping fat cats, they are much more complex than that, with many more layers. And I never said it was business leaders being caring, it's about economics. An economic imperative may force government intervention.
> 
> (For the record the vast majority of business leaders I've worked with make their own coffee, and answer their own phone. The business world really doesn't work like an episode of Mad Men anymore)


i did dramatise the point slightly and i am aware that it is not that simple

my point is that this has been going on for years and not many people, certainly not business, gave a shit when it was cleaners having to spend hours travelling to sometimes numerous shitty jobs as they could only afford to live much further out.

i also know all too well that governments listen to business, bend over for business and do allsorts for their mates and to keep their donations coming in alongside the directorships, free lunches and dinners.

does it have to be that way? does the massive gap between those at the top and those at the bottom only appear on the radar when it starts affecting some junior staff or some relative of theirs who can't buy in Balham for example?


----------



## Manter (Feb 25, 2014)

ddraig said:


> my bitterness? wtf
> where has that comment come from?


Sorry, it was a bitchy comment from me and didn't really help the discussion


----------



## Manter (Feb 25, 2014)

ddraig said:


> i did dramatise the point slightly and i am aware that it is not that simple
> 
> my point is that this has been going on for years and not many people, certainly not business, gave a shit when it was cleaners having to spend hours travelling to sometimes numerous shitty jobs as they could only afford to live much further out.
> 
> ...


yes, completely agree with you on that.  But the point is that now they can't get junior staff- or for that matter most middle managers*- maybe, just maybe, something'll be done.  Not right it has taken till now, but surely the government can't continue to ignore the problem?

*or even quite a few senior staff (thinking of a guy I spoke to before I went on mat leave)


----------



## editor (Feb 25, 2014)

Thanks to RoyReed for letting me share the love about the subverted estate agent boards. 












http://www.brixtonbuzz.com/2014/02/...s-subverted-by-i-love-council-houses-posters/


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Feb 25, 2014)

It's great to see some signs of protest.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 25, 2014)

i spotted a foxtons mini in the angel yesterday. fuckers seem to have brought them back.


----------



## CH1 (Feb 25, 2014)

Manter said:


> Jesus…. they should be encouraging parents to spend an extra 20 minutes reading with their little darlings, not to falsify official records.  What sort of example does that send the next generation, FFS?  All this talk of schools needing to provide a moral structure and social education, and the parents are teaching the kids to be devious, self serving shits who lie, scheme and trample on others for the slightest advantage.


Sorry to interject when the moment has passed but...
My mum started teaching me to read before I went to infant school.
Was she self-serving, or are you saying that modern mums just pretend to do such things so they can tick boxes?
Am I abnormal or has the world gone mad?
Confused of Coldharbour Lane?


----------



## Manter (Feb 25, 2014)

CH1 said:


> Sorry to interject when the moment has passed but...
> My mum started teaching me to read before I went to infant school.
> Was she self-serving, or are you saying that modern mums just pretend to do such things so they can tick boxes?
> Am I abnormal or has the world gone mad?
> Confused of Coldharbour Lane?


I'm sure mums do do that- I have no problem with parents reading with kids.  Quite the opposite…..

It was the pretending to live places they don't that was pissing me off

Also confused of 'twixt the hills


----------



## T & P (Feb 25, 2014)

editor said:


> Thanks to RoyReed for letting me share the love about the subverted estate agent boards.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Even if there was a justification in the past for estate agents' signs to be put up and invade public space, surely in this day and age there is absolutely no need for them? Why are they still being allowed this absurd practice/ free advertising? Who the fuck roams the streets trying to spot 'for sale' signs when looking at buying a house nowadays?


----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2014)

it is about presence, branding, market domination etc init


----------



## Manter (Feb 25, 2014)

ddraig said:


> it is about presence, branding, market domination etc init


what he says.  its aimed at sellers, so they think 'oooh, they're busy round here, I'll list my house with them'


----------



## cuppa tee (Feb 25, 2014)

Manter said:


> I'm sure mums do do that- I have no problem with parents reading with kids.  Quite the opposite…..


some people find it tedious and time consuming so they pay someone else to do it....... it's also not unheard of to ship private tutors to rented Tuscan villas for the summer hols so DD or DS has the edge when it comes to entrance tests etc.


----------



## T & P (Feb 25, 2014)

It still shouldn't be allowed, though. I struggle to think of any other industry where companies are allowed to plaster advertising boards all over public roads and (presumably) without having to pay any fees or taxes for it, informing everyone of their commercial transactions.


----------



## nagapie (Feb 25, 2014)

Cowley said:


> Must be very wealthy landlords.
> 
> Unless you are in a situation where you have no alternative but to invest your "surplus" amounts of wealth into property, I can't for the life of me understand how spending 500K on a 1 bed flat amounts to a good investment. I dunno...maybe I am missing something here.



Well assuming that most London properties increase in value or stay the same and assuming that most landlords are well off so have access to deposits and cheap mortgage, they can buy a flat and get someone else's rent to pay off the mortgage. Thus adding to their property portfolio. And if things stay as they currently are, they will also make profit as mortgages go down and rents go up.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 25, 2014)

cuppa tee said:


> buy to let, rent flat out but keep the owners name on the council tax bill so you get kids into the school and a bit of an earner on the side possibly... it's quite common by the Graveney School in Wandsworth so I'm told



Yep.  The person who bought a mate's 2-bed flat at Amen Corner, did so for that purpose. "Lived" there for a year during the week (actually living in the family home in South Wimbledon, but paying the utilities and council tax for the emtpy flat), then once the kid was in school, sold the place.  Cost: About £8,000 excluding fees, which he made back when he sold the flat. It's cuntish because it "steals" places from local kids (my brother's two kids went to Graveney, but they lived in the cachement area since the eldest was primary school age), some of whom end up having to travel several miles to alternative schools.


----------



## Manter (Feb 25, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> Yep.  The person who bought a mate's 2-bed flat at Amen Corner, did so for that purpose. "Lived" there for a year during the week (actually living in the family home in South Wimbledon, but paying the utilities and council tax for the emtpy flat), then once the kid was in school, sold the place.  Cost: About £8,000 excluding fees, which he made back when he sold the flat. It's cuntish because it "steals" places from local kids (my brother's two kids went to Graveney, but they lived in the cachement area since the eldest was primary school age), some of whom end up having to travel several miles to alternative schools.


And it means the entitled parents are 'paying' for their child's education without having the honesty to admit they are paying for it pay the full whack


----------



## leanderman (Feb 25, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> Yep.  The person who bought a mate's 2-bed flat at Amen Corner, did so for that purpose. "Lived" there for a year during the week (actually living in the family home in South Wimbledon, but paying the utilities and council tax for the emtpy flat), then once the kid was in school, sold the place.  Cost: About £8,000 excluding fees, which he made back when he sold the flat. It's cuntish because it "steals" places from local kids (my brother's two kids went to Graveney, but they lived in the cachement area since the eldest was primary school age), some of whom end up having to travel several miles to alternative schools.



Where do you draw the time-line on residence?

One year, two years, three years?

Distance catchments have this fundamental problem.

Who, in the end, is actually 'indigenous' to the catchment?


----------



## leanderman (Feb 25, 2014)

Manter said:


> And it means the entitled parents are 'paying' for their child's education without having the honesty to admit they are paying for it pay the full whack



More often they (paper)profit the money as their house rockets in value!


----------



## Smick (Feb 25, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> Yep.  The person who bought a mate's 2-bed flat at Amen Corner, did so for that purpose. "Lived" there for a year during the week (actually living in the family home in South Wimbledon, but paying the utilities and council tax for the emtpy flat), then once the kid was in school, sold the place.  Cost: About £8,000 excluding fees, which he made back when he sold the flat. It's cuntish because it "steals" places from local kids (my brother's two kids went to Graveney, but they lived in the cachement area since the eldest was primary school age), some of whom end up having to travel several miles to alternative schools.


 Streatham and Clapham school for girls costs £9k per year at primary. I am not sure if a Sudbourne or Corpus Christi education is comparable to that school but a one-off hit for £8k which gets your current and subsequent children in seems like a good idea to me when compared with private education.


----------



## sparkybird (Feb 25, 2014)

This week I was working for a lovely retired customer of mine who lives in Dulwich. She knows I live in Brixton. She mentioned  how it was now 'the place to live'. I mentioned it was crazy about house prices. 

But my dear - says she - they're all moving there for the schools. 
Eh? I replied, last time I looked the schools in Brixton weren't that great.....
Oh don't be silly - they're moving there for Dulwich College
Me - oh yeh of course they are....

Which I suppose got me thinking, Brixton is good value compared to Dulwich, so the money saved CAN be spent on school fees. Yikes!


----------



## han (Feb 25, 2014)

Oh my god.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Feb 25, 2014)

It doesn't have a catchment area, though, you could live wherever you like. In fact it takes boarders.


----------



## leanderman (Feb 25, 2014)

FridgeMagnet said:


> It doesn't have a catchment area, though, you could live wherever you like. In fact it takes boarders.



True. But lots seem to live around here

Then they move next to Sudbourne school to repeat the cycle again!


----------



## RoyReed (Feb 25, 2014)

editor said:


> Thanks to RoyReed for letting me share the love about the subverted estate agent boards.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


These boards were all replaced this morning with lovely pristine new ones.


----------



## editor (Feb 26, 2014)

RoyReed said:


> These boards were all replaced this morning with lovely pristine new ones.


*unlike


----------



## Manter (Feb 26, 2014)

FridgeMagnet said:


> It doesn't have a catchment area, though, you could live wherever you like. In fact it takes boarders.


Yeah, I was going to mention exams and interviews too. You can live opposite and if your little darling can't jump through the right hoops, it will make no difference


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Feb 26, 2014)

RoyReed said:


> These boards were all replaced this morning with lovely pristine new ones.


The estate agents are *very quick* to replace any signs which are removed/fall over in the wind - usually within 24 hours I've noticed


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Feb 26, 2014)

Just remembered, I went for a walk around Clapham the other day with Ms Hatter and we noticed in an estate agent window that some of the houses in Clapham were _cheaper_ than in Brixton


----------



## Boudicca (Feb 26, 2014)

Brixton Hatter said:


> The estate agents are *very quick* to replace any signs which are removed/fall over in the wind - usually within 24 hours I've noticed


I think the placement of sign boards is contracted out, so there is one bloke with a truck who puts the signs up for all the estate agents.


----------



## Manter (Feb 26, 2014)

Boudicca said:


> I think the placement of sign boards is contracted out, so there is one bloke with a truck who puts the signs up for all the estate agents.


they have to take them down within a set time don't they?  I don't think they obey the rules, mind you


----------



## colacubes (Feb 26, 2014)

Manter said:


> they have to take them down within a set time don't they?  I don't think they obey the rules, mind you



It's 14 days after completion of sale I believe.


----------



## Boudicca (Feb 26, 2014)

Yes, very quick to put them up and very slow to take them down.  

I do agree that they are less important nowadays as not many people will be roaming the streets looking for sign boards, but I suspect they are more useful in targeting potential sellers i.e.  'Oh, Haarts have got three for sale in my road, they must be OK'.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Feb 26, 2014)

colacubes said:


> It's 14 days after completion of sale I believe.


Yes, two weeks. I checked it out. They blatantly ignore it though. None of them EVER get taken down. Householders are left to do it themselves - many don't bother for months.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Feb 26, 2014)

Boudicca said:


> Yes, very quick to put them up and very slow to take them down.
> 
> I do agree that they are less important nowadays as not many people will be roaming the streets looking for sign boards, but I suspect they are more useful in targeting potential sellers i.e.  'Oh, Haarts have got three for sale in my road, they must be OK'.


Yes, it's just raising brand awareness. If other companies could stick up big signs with their company's name on them in the street wherever they liked and get away with it they would. There are, however, generally regulations about that sort of thing.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 26, 2014)

Manter said:


> And it means the entitled parents are 'paying' for their child's education without having the honesty to admit they are paying for it pay the full whack



Yup.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 26, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Where do you draw the time-line on residence?
> 
> One year, two years, three years?
> 
> ...



*Habitual* residents of the cachement area. For secondary schools, kids who've been to local primary schools, with other kids admitted on a by-the-case basis.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 26, 2014)

Smick said:


> Streatham and Clapham school for girls costs £9k per year at primary. I am not sure if a Sudbourne or Corpus Christi education is comparable to that school but a one-off hit for £8k which gets your current and subsequent children in seems like a good idea to me when compared with private education.



It's still the type of exploitation of capital that sticks in my craw, though.


----------



## RoyReed (Feb 26, 2014)

Brixton Hatter said:


> Just remembered, I went for a walk around Clapham the other day with Ms Hatter and we noticed in an estate agent window that some of the houses in Clapham were _cheaper_ than in Brixton


That wouldn't be difficult. Not all parts of Clapham have 6 bedroom mansions overlooking the Common.

Also, in Brixton I believe you have to pay a lot extra for that 'edgy vibe'.


----------



## leanderman (Feb 26, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> *Habitual* residents of the cachement area. For secondary schools, kids who've been to local primary schools, with other kids admitted on a by-the-case basis.



It will still come down to cash-ment. Multi-school lottery is the way to go.


----------



## cuppa tee (Feb 26, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Multi-school lottery is the way to go.


how would that work and who would run it ?


----------



## Cowley (Feb 26, 2014)

sparkybird said:


> Which I suppose got me thinking, Brixton is good value compared to Dulwich, so the money saved CAN be spent on school fees. Yikes!


 
That certainly happens in Streatham, I know of two families on the street I live on that do that. They bought a House in Streatham, but educate their kids at Private School in Dulwich, I think it's quite a common thing to do.


----------



## Smick (Feb 26, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> It's still the type of exploitation of capital that sticks in my craw, though.


 
Yep. One rule for the rich.... The fact that an empty flat currently appreciates at a rate to make the whole venture profitable is even worse.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Feb 26, 2014)

modern estate agents:


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 26, 2014)

Smick said:


> Yep. One rule for the rich.... The fact that an empty flat currently appreciates at a rate to make the whole venture profitable is even worse.



As I said to my s-i-l (which got her goat, being as she lives there) "and in Tooting, too!".


----------



## leanderman (Feb 26, 2014)

cuppa tee said:


> how would that work and who would run it ?



Council.

Some schools already operate it: Kingsdale in Dulwich and Trinity Academy in Brixton.

But I'd do it on the basis that kids have an equal chance of entering any one of their five nearest schools.

And they could still choose their favourite if not oversubscribed.

It would break this rich-poor ghettoisation overnight.


----------



## cuppa tee (Feb 27, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Council.
> 
> Some schools already operate it: Kingsdale in Dulwich and Trinity Academy in Brixton.
> 
> ...



By coincidence this was in the news today...............http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-26354648


----------



## Smick (Feb 27, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Council.
> 
> Some schools already operate it: Kingsdale in Dulwich and Trinity Academy in Brixton.
> 
> ...


 
Don't forget, it is in families which have one parent whose wages are sufficient for the whole family or where there is multiple, or even single, car ownership that going to the fifth nearest school is easiest.

Put both parents to work and introduce two bus journeys each way to get kids to and from school, at a cost of £19.50 per week for a bus pass for the adult, while walking past the school next door to make your journey to the fifth nearest school. Then tell me if a five school lottery is a good idea.


----------



## leanderman (Feb 27, 2014)

Smick said:


> Don't forget, it is in families which have one parent whose wages are sufficient for the whole family or where there is multiple, or even single, car ownership that going to the fifth nearest school is easiest.
> 
> Put both parents to work and introduce two bus journeys each way to get kids to and from school, at a cost of £19.50 per week for a bus pass for the adult, while walking past the school next door to make your journey to the fifth nearest school. Then tell me if a five school lottery is a good idea.



I still think it is. Or ghettoisation. As now. 

And I think secondary-age kids get on buses on their own.


----------



## Smick (Feb 27, 2014)

Oh, I was talking about primary, but looking back to where you suggested lotteries, I can see that it is in reply to a post about secondary schools.


----------



## leanderman (Feb 27, 2014)

Smick said:


> Oh, I was talking about primary, but looking back to where you suggested lotteries, I can see that it is in reply to a post about secondary schools.



I'd do it with primaries too. But make it walkable.


----------



## leanderman (Feb 27, 2014)

Latest net migration figures - a major rise from 150,000 to 212,000 a year - suggest to me that the pressure on housing is going to get worse and worse. 

Most of the influx will be to London, which is struggling to build enough homes as it is.


----------



## leanderman (Feb 27, 2014)

Just got some insight into who is buying these places from art school niece, who lives round corner. 

A year ago, father of art school niece's pal tried to buy this pal and pal's brother (both late-ish 20s) a house by Sudbourne for something like £650,000.

Deal fell through. They tried again three months ago, even though price now £900,000+.

Collapsed again - but are now buying in Loughborough Junction.

(Family from Beckenham, father an accountant, business owner)


----------



## leanderman (Mar 1, 2014)

This place in St Saviours Rd, Brixton Hill, sold for £250,000 in October. After a quick refurb. it's up for £425,000

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-29180841.html

£984 a sq ft - surely a new record.


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Mar 2, 2014)

Interesting book review by Nick Cohen (not one of my favourite journalists);

All That Is Solid review – Danny Dorling's brilliant study of Britain's housing disaster.
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/mar/02/all-that-is-solid-review-house-prices-danny-dorling

_The coalition has taken John Stuart Mill's criticism that landlords "grow rich in their sleep without working, risking or economising", and treated it as a compliment. It gives the 2% of the population that make up the landlord interest tens of billions of pounds of public money in the form of housing benefit and guarantees for speculative building. As for the increasingly privatised world of social housing, we are told that it is the home for scroungers.

One third of the council homes sold to tenants by Margaret Thatcher are now owned by buy-to-let landlords._


----------



## leanderman (Mar 2, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> Interesting book review by Nick Cohen (not one of my favourite journalists);
> 
> All That Is Solid review – Danny Dorling's brilliant study of Britain's housing disaster.
> http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/mar/02/all-that-is-solid-review-house-prices-danny-dorling
> ...



Nick Cohen's generally pretty good. Although, some times, his stuff is very poorly written. 

Such as this: http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/nick-c...silenced-one-of-the-best-officers-in-britain/


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Mar 2, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Nick Cohen's generally pretty good. Although, some times, his stuff is very poorly written.
> 
> Such as this: http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/nick-c...silenced-one-of-the-best-officers-in-britain/



The second paragraph is a bit confusing.


----------



## domestos (Mar 2, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> Middle class people.



Horrendous quality. I live nearby and saw the Hayter Road flat when the whole house was first converted - tiny and botched, shortly after, Lambeth Council stopped planning permission for over developed property but Govt has compelled local councils to be more favourable now. Builder called Baccus (yes really) caused subsidence to next door and this building started falling apart almost immediately.


----------



## Winot (Mar 2, 2014)

leanderman said:


> I'd do it with primaries too. But make it walkable.



Analysis on R4 tonight at 9.30pm is about lotteries.


----------



## colacubes (Mar 2, 2014)

Do they not do school lotteries in Brighton?

ETA - they do.  I haven't read enough to know whether a good thing or bad thing, but in theory it's got to stop some of the postcode buying up bullshit surely.


----------



## leanderman (Mar 2, 2014)

colacubes said:


> Do they not do school lotteries in Brighton?
> 
> ETA - they do.  I haven't read enough to know whether a good thing or bad thing, but in theory it's got to stop some of the postcode buying up bullshit surely.



Colleague doubts value of lottery  - and his kids are at secondary - but Brighton may be too small for a true reading.


----------



## Cowley (Mar 3, 2014)

leanderman said:


> This place in St Saviours Rd, Brixton Hill, sold for £250,000 in October. After a quick refurb. it's up for £425,000
> 
> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-29180841.html
> 
> £984 a sq ft - surely a new record.


 
Jesus


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Mar 4, 2014)

Lol, if you think it's bad now;
Average small central London flat to cost £36m by 2050, investor predicts.
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/mar/04/average-small-central-london-flat-36m-2050


----------



## leanderman (Mar 5, 2014)

The gentrification concerns so often raised here have uncanny parallels in San Francisco.

At least according to Rebecca Solnit In the London Review of Books ('Go back to Palo Alto', Feb 20). 

She looks at how the Silicon Valley goldrush has caused a housing crisis for the have-nots. Brilliant stuff.


----------



## leanderman (Apr 7, 2014)

The madness continues:

Foxtons asking for £1.8m for a four-bedroom house next to Sudbourne School

http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/32414859?search_identifier=6d6e263b85c7c251354728961d4067da

and up to £1million for the flats being built in the old printworks on Brixton hill

http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/30455798?search_identifier=60ca213f5418b8dd3d80e6ee94b81902


----------



## madolesance (Apr 7, 2014)

leanderman said:


> The madness continues:
> 
> Foxtons asking for £1.8m for a four-bedroom house next to Sudbourne School
> 
> ...



The obsession continues....


----------



## leanderman (Apr 7, 2014)

madolesance said:


> The obsession continues....



Busted!


----------



## CH1 (Apr 10, 2014)

Recently built Wiltshire Road ex-council house: in the Standard yesterday @ £525,000, now apparently under offer. 
http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?loc...=map&search_type=SS&sold=1&submit_type=search


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Apr 10, 2014)

CH1 said:


> Recently built Wiltshire Road ex-council house: in the Standard yesterday @ £525,000, now apparently under offer.
> http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?loc...=map&search_type=SS&sold=1&submit_type=search



Sisulu Place?


----------



## boohoo (Apr 10, 2014)

CH1 said:


> Recently built Wiltshire Road ex-council house: in the Standard yesterday @ £525,000, now apparently under offer.
> http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?loc...=map&search_type=SS&sold=1&submit_type=search


Wow! But it does have a lot of floor space. Loads of place really don't. Carefully (or not) carved up 1 bedroom flats to make 2 beds with rooms in odd locations and often with a pokey kitchen/diner can be found a lot online.


----------



## CH1 (Apr 10, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> Sisulu Place?


Yes that is clear from the final photo of the paved garden area. These houses were built around 1986/7 - must have been the last council houses built in Lambeth.


----------



## passivejoe (Apr 19, 2014)

Where's Leanderman?

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-30023823.html


----------



## leanderman (Apr 19, 2014)

Dare not comment, for fear of being branded obsessive!


----------



## Belushi (Apr 19, 2014)

Nice house, but 1.6 million?


----------



## leanderman (Apr 19, 2014)

Belushi said:


> Nice house, but 1.6 million?



OK, I will comment: Others nearby, without the big front garden, on at 975k and 750k.


----------



## Pinggoombah (Apr 19, 2014)

leanderman said:


> OK, I will comment: Others nearby, without the big front garden, on at 975k and 750k.


Obsessive.


----------



## Chilavert (Apr 19, 2014)

passivejoe said:


> Where's Leanderman?
> 
> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-30023823.html


Amazon scones.


----------



## CH1 (May 7, 2014)

Just to keep the thread up to date, in the Standard today, Blenheim Gardens Edwardian House benefiting from gorgeous Edwardian features @ £1,200,000 http://www.foxtons.co.uk/property-for-sale-in-brixton/chpk2574022


----------



## Brixton Hatter (May 7, 2014)

Fuck this house price shit, we're supposed to be plotting the downfall of Foxtons!

I'm planning my next move….if I receive any more of those fucking "we're looking for property in your street" letters I am going to personally visit the said estate agent and demonstrate exactly where they can stick their letter.


----------



## leanderman (May 8, 2014)

CH1 said:


> Just to keep the thread up to date, in the Standard today, Blenheim Gardens Edwardian House benefiting from gorgeous Edwardian features @ £1,200,000 http://www.foxtons.co.uk/property-for-sale-in-brixton/chpk2574022



For the first time, that hits the £1k level in my favourite measure of property madness: £ per sq ft

(1,207 sq ft)


----------



## Rushy (May 8, 2014)

leanderman said:


> For the first time, that hits the £1k level in my favourite measure of property madness: £ per sq ft
> 
> (1,207 sq ft)


There was a tiny flat achieved that on Saltoun Road last month, I think. It was two bedrooms and a living room within the loft space of a single terrace house. Has a 200sqft terrace.
http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/31590196

That's £1,117/sqft.


----------



## leanderman (May 8, 2014)

Rushy said:


> There was a tiny flat achieved that on Saltoun Road last month, I think. It was two bedrooms and a living room within the loft space of a single terrace house. Has a 200sqft terrace.
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/31590196
> 
> That's £1,117/sqft.



This is £994/sqft. 

No cellar. Very small fourth bedroom, smallish kitchen and a modest garden.


----------



## leanderman (May 8, 2014)

Rushy said:


> There was a tiny flat achieved that on Saltoun Road last month, I think. It was two bedrooms and a living room within the loft space of a single terrace house. Has a 200sqft terrace.
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/31590196
> 
> That's £1,117/sqft.



HIlarious floorplan. You stare at it and think there's a room or two missing


----------



## Remus Harbank (May 8, 2014)

leanderman said:


> HIlarious floorplan. You stare at it and think there's a room or two missing


The flat features "Great Geometry." scraping the metaphorical barrel more like.


----------



## sparkybird (May 9, 2014)

CH1 said:


> Just to keep the thread up to date, in the Standard today, Blenheim Gardens Edwardian House benefiting from gorgeous Edwardian features @ £1,200,000 http://www.foxtons.co.uk/property-for-sale-in-brixton/chpk2574022



It's been on the market a while and was on with Haart for the same price before Foxtons - something tells me it's a tad overpriced! I reckon it they dropped to a million it'd sell


----------



## twistedAM (May 9, 2014)

leanderman said:


> This is £994/sqft.
> 
> No cellar. Very small fourth bedroom, smallish kitchen and a modest garden.



Those houses aren't as good as, say Leander Road. Modest is being kind about the size of gardens on that side of the street and the rooms aren't that big. Last year Foxtons put a house a couple of doors down on the market at £950k but word is it went for £875k.
A couple of shire types were looking at it the other week and asked me what the neighbourhood was like (whilst staring at a menacing-looking sludge metal poster on the wall outside the Windmill). I pointed to my right and said that the Blenheim Gardens estate (which on a dreary day was looking suitable pallid and communist-era east European)  is about a quarter of a mile long and this is the street people enter it by. I think i did my anti-Foxtons bit that day.

(Not doing down the street or estate at all; I just didn't like this pair much)


----------



## uk benzo (May 9, 2014)

2 bed flat in herne Hill for 750k. Unbelievable!

http://m.zoopla.co.uk/#/for-sale/details/32833775?search_identifier=3647f8206d9884d08c1564812ac1fdc5


----------



## leanderman (May 9, 2014)

uk benzo said:


> 2 bed flat in herne Hill for 750k. Unbelievable!
> 
> http://m.zoopla.co.uk/#/for-sale/details/32833775?search_identifier=3647f8206d9884d08c1564812ac1fdc5



£893/sqft


----------



## SpamMisery (May 9, 2014)

In all fairness, that looks like a very well done place


----------



## Dr. Furface (May 10, 2014)

uk benzo said:


> 2 bed flat in herne Hill for 750k. Unbelievable!
> 
> http://m.zoopla.co.uk/#/for-sale/details/32833775?search_identifier=3647f8206d9884d08c1564812ac1fdc5


Yuk, horribly ostentatious, esp the bathroom and the ludicrous balustrades in the garden, which is too small and shabby. The off-road parking space adds value, but if you could afford that price then I'm sure you could find something much more tasteful and better value.


----------



## Belushi (May 10, 2014)

Yeah, doesn't work at all for me though they've obviously put a lot of work in to it.


----------



## teuchter (May 10, 2014)

I was just having a laugh at the fancy lamp-post thing at the end of the garden.


----------



## Dr. Furface (May 10, 2014)

teuchter said:


> I was just having a laugh at the fancy lamp-post thing at the end of the garden.


So tacky!


----------



## mxh (May 12, 2014)

Fantasy house price continues

4 bed house Sudbourne road £1,795,000

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-45400667.html

The vendors can not be serious about selling with that price.


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (May 12, 2014)

mxh said:


> Fantasy house price continues
> 
> 4 bed house Sudbourne road £1,795,000
> 
> ...



All that money and no taste, the furniture is off the cuff.


----------



## leanderman (May 12, 2014)

mxh said:


> Fantasy house price continues
> 
> 4 bed house Sudbourne road £1,795,000
> 
> ...



School cashment and lovely house - but that is a joke.

pretty sure it is not 41ft garden either. looks like a 41ft 'side return'!


----------



## leanderman (May 12, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> All that money and no taste, the furniture is off the cuff.



yes. the decor is no good.


----------



## Manter (May 12, 2014)

Dr. Furface said:


> Yuk, horribly ostentatious, esp the bathroom and the ludicrous balustrades in the garden, which is too small and shabby. The off-road parking space adds value, but if you could afford that price then I'm sure you could find something much more tasteful and better value.


I'd never want to buy something someone else had completely finished- their taste will always be different from yours. I'd rather check structural stuff and ignore whatever crimes against taste have gone on.


----------



## leanderman (May 12, 2014)

£898/sqft


----------



## Manter (May 12, 2014)

leanderman said:


> yes. the decor is no good.


Dunno. Apart from the living room, which is utterly, utterly baffling, there is some nice antique furniture in there.  I suspect its nicer IRL than in pictures- the houses that photograph best are often very sparse and beige when you actually view them.

£1.7m though.  Wtf?


----------



## equationgirl (May 12, 2014)

Hasn't that one been kicking about for a while though? I recognise the photos 

And come on, at least put a duvet on the bed, don't just put a throw over the mattress and expect everyone to be convinced it looks like a real bed. The living room is too cluttered, odd when a lot of the rest of the house is fairly empty. Crap staging?


----------



## equationgirl (May 12, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> All that money and no taste, *the furniture is off the cuff*.


I see what you did there


----------



## Manter (May 12, 2014)

equationgirl said:


> Hasn't that one been kicking about for a while though? I recognise the photos
> 
> And come on, at least put a duvet on the bed, don't just put a throw over the mattress and expect everyone to be convinced it looks like a real bed. The living room is too cluttered, odd when a lot of the rest of the house is fairly empty. Crap staging?


photograph 10, they haven't shut the drawers on the chest of drawers.  FFS people, you know your house is going to be photographed!!

Actually, mixture of made up and not rooms makes me wonder if its a post divorce sale? //speculation on minimal evidence


----------



## equationgirl (May 12, 2014)

Manter said:


> photograph 10, they haven't shut the drawers on the chest of drawers.  FFS people, you know your house is going to be photographed!!
> 
> Actually, mixture of made up and not rooms makes me wonder if its a post divorce sale? //speculation on minimal evidence


I saw that and was secretly appalled. It's not hard to do is it?


----------



## Manter (May 12, 2014)

equationgirl said:


> I saw that and was secretly appalled. It's not hard to do is it?


i have to post this really, don't I?

http://terriblerealestateagentphotos.com


----------



## leanderman (May 12, 2014)

Manter said:


> £1.7m though.  Wtf?



But 7 per cent cheaper than this one a couple of streets away.

It's £959/sqft  and possibly more if they have (wrongly in my view) included the cellar in the size calculation.

http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/32717490?search_identifier=ae2a1cbc8bab242bd5142973eae6993f


----------



## passivejoe (May 14, 2014)

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-46306184.html

Not exactly in perfect condition... and a very weird shaped garden...and just 2 beds with a bathroom in the kitchen for £775k.


----------



## boohoo (May 14, 2014)

passivejoe said:


> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-46306184.html
> 
> Not exactly in perfect condition... and a very weird shaped garden...and just 2 beds with a bathroom in the kitchen for £775k.



The floor size is fairly big. However still shocks me that a two-bed in Brixton can go for this cash.


----------



## Winot (May 14, 2014)

Price per square foot leanderman?


----------



## Rushy (May 14, 2014)

Winot said:


> Price per square foot leanderman?


About £800 if you exclude the basement. Even cheaper if you include it. Bargain!
Highish stair and corridor / living space ratio though.


----------



## leanderman (May 14, 2014)

Rushy said:


> About £800 if you exclude the basement. Even cheaper if you include it. Bargain!
> Highish stair and corridor / living space ratio though.



Another property, right next to the cashment school, sneakily without a sales board: 

http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/32852314?featured=1&utm_content=featured_listing

£1.4million. Around £780/sqft


----------



## ddraig (May 14, 2014)

that is a nice  looking place
wtf is going on in pic 14? 
is it 2 rooms with a hatch and curtains? or a big bay window with small windows?


----------



## teuchter (May 14, 2014)

It's the little projecting window you can see above the front door in the first photo.


----------



## ddraig (May 14, 2014)

thanks that makes sense


----------



## leanderman (May 14, 2014)

ddraig said:


> that is a nice  looking place
> wtf is going on in pic 14?
> is it 2 rooms with a hatch and curtains? or a big bay window with small windows?



Owned by a newspaper executive I think. Probably moving on for school reasons - again!


----------



## Manter (May 14, 2014)

passivejoe said:


> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-46306184.html
> 
> Not exactly in perfect condition... and a very weird shaped garden...and just 2 beds with a bathroom in the kitchen for £775k.


I think that's really horrible.  Can't put my finger on why, precisely, but I really, really don't like it


----------



## equationgirl (May 14, 2014)

Lovely house, shame about the nauseating description.


----------



## Manter (May 14, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Another property, right next to the cashment school, sneakily without a sales board:
> 
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/32852314?featured=1&utm_content=featured_listing
> 
> £1.4million. Around £780/sqft


I like that.  However, the thing that made me snort about the listing was all the artistic close ups….


----------



## equationgirl (May 14, 2014)

Manter said:


> I like that.  However, the thing that made me snort about the listing was all the artistic close ups….


Padding if ever I saw it, especially the LCC engraved into stone (which was then pounced upon as a USP). It's 3 letters in a bit of stone!


----------



## Manter (May 14, 2014)

equationgirl said:


> Padding if ever I saw it, especially the LCC engraved into stone (which was then pounced upon as a USP). It's 3 letters in a bit of stone!


I reckon that photographer is padding his portfolio on the estate agent's time


----------



## leanderman (May 14, 2014)

Manter said:


> I reckon that photographer is padding his portfolio on the estate agent's time



Strongly suspect the pictures are taken by the owner, newspaper (photo) executive.


----------



## Rushy (May 14, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Strongly suspect the pictures are taken by the owner, newspaper (photo) executive.


Wooster & Stock like to be a bit artsy though.


----------



## sparkybird (May 14, 2014)

Manter said:


> I think that's really horrible.  Can't put my finger on why, precisely, but I really, really don't like it



I think it's pine overload - not just the floors (which I don't mind) but the kitchen, beds, cupboards etc etc


----------



## Manter (May 14, 2014)

sparkybird said:


> I think it's pine overload - not just the floors (which I don't mind) but the kitchen, beds, cupboards etc etc


I think it's also the bedroom opening onto the garden. Dunno. Horrid though


----------



## sleaterkinney (May 14, 2014)

I really don't understand how people can afford some of these.


----------



## leanderman (May 14, 2014)

sleaterkinney said:


> I really don't understand how people can afford some of these.



That's the mystery.


----------



## sleaterkinney (May 14, 2014)

leanderman said:


> That's the mystery.


That two bedroomed flat, say you had 10% deposit, that still comes to over a 100k with stamp duty, then you have to find 4k a month repayments. Nuts.


----------



## leanderman (May 14, 2014)

sleaterkinney said:


> That two bedroomed flat, say you had 10% deposit, that still comes to over a 100k with stamp duty, then you have to find 4k a month repayments. Nuts.


Exactly - and before rates rise.

Also, you would need a household income of something like £200,000 to get a bank to lend to you.

So these deals must be backed up by massive deposits - and very few people - or their parents - can have that sort of cash lying around.


----------



## Smick (May 14, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Exactly - and before rates rise.
> 
> Also, you would need a household income of something like £200,000 to get a bank to lend to you.
> 
> So these deals must be backed up by massive deposits - and very few people - or their parents - can have that sort of cash lying around.


 
Surely people earning that sort of money don't want to live in two bed flats.

Would the rental income cover a mortgage?

People must just be buying them with hope of capital appreciation.


----------



## Chilavert (May 14, 2014)

I've just put my flat on the market and I felt obliged, on behalf of this thread, to get the place valued by Foxtons. 

The agent was truly everything I'd expected and more; arrogant, didn't listen to a word I said and then gave me a hugely inflated valuation.  

Needless to say I declined to employ him to sell my flat.


----------



## Boudicca (May 14, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Another property, right next to the cashment school, sneakily without a sales board:
> 
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/32852314?featured=1&utm_content=featured_listing
> 
> £1.4million. Around £780/sqft


I told my estate agent I didn't want a sales board as I didn't want to feature on leanderman's hit list.


----------



## leanderman (May 14, 2014)

Smick said:


> Surely people earning that sort of money don't want to live in two bed flats.
> 
> Would the rental income cover a mortgage?
> 
> People must just be buying them with hope of capital appreciation.



Exactly. Even two or three years ago, these flats would have worked for first-time buyers.

No more


----------



## equationgirl (May 15, 2014)

Smick said:


> Surely people earning that sort of money don't want to live in two bed flats.
> 
> Would the rental income cover a mortgage?
> 
> People must just be buying them with hope of capital appreciation.


I did a quick run-through on a bank's mortgage calculator

For an annual salary of £200k, assuming a deposit of £175k, with one person applying for the mortgage (fixed over 25 years) the repayments work out as £3020 per month. Max allowable borrowing was £600k (3 x salary). Take that down to a £75k deposit and the monthly repayment goes up to £4252.

So unless you have a sizeable deposit (and I mean big enough to buy a reasonable place in Glasgow outright in cash), it's going to be tough to do even on a large salary. Just shows how ridiculous the housing market has become.


----------



## teuchter (May 15, 2014)

If you already own in london though, and hence have somewhere to sell at equally inflated prices, then the sums are rather different. There's your large deposit.


----------



## Winot (May 15, 2014)

You could always move to Japan. I was talking to an associate yesterday in Osaka who was shocked at London house prices. He had bought a plot of land for US$230,000 in 2001 and built a house for $200,000. 

Since then, through some weird Japanese depreciation of houses and falling land prices, the whole thing is worth less than $200,000.

Mind you, he has a three hour round commute into Osaka, and it'd  be even longer to London.


----------



## Smick (May 15, 2014)

teuchter said:


> If you already own in london though, and hence have somewhere to sell at equally inflated prices, then the sums are rather different. There's your large deposit.


 
Quite a limited pool of people who have somewhere already but want to trade up to a two bed flat.

Maybe there are a lot of older people in the £1.7m houses whose kids have left so they are going smaller and pocketing the remainder.


----------



## leanderman (May 15, 2014)

The Economist nails it: low rates of building, easy money and spectacular population growth ... http://www.economist.com/blogs/econ...?fsrc=scn/tw/te/bl/ee/londonhousepricesoaring


----------



## SpamMisery (May 15, 2014)

Right, so a one child policy, a ban on immigration and shifting the poor north should fix that. I would make a fine UKIP MP.


----------



## SarfLondoner (May 15, 2014)

leanderman said:


> The Economist nails it: low rates of building, easy money and spectacular population growth ... http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2014/05/economist-explains-4?fsrc=scn/tw/te/bl/ee/londonhousepricesoaring


Do the policy makers/government have any interest in bringing the boom to an end?


----------



## Winot (May 15, 2014)

SarfLondoner said:


> Do the policy makers/government have any interest in bringing the boom to an end?



Not while young people don't vote.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 18, 2014)

leanderman said:


> The Economist nails it: low rates of building, easy money and spectacular population growth ... http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2014/05/economist-explains-4?fsrc=scn/tw/te/bl/ee/londonhousepricesoaring



_The Economist_ has "nailed" what most of us on here have been saying for at least the last 12 months. 
Aren't they the sharp ones!


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 18, 2014)

SpamMisery said:


> Right, so a one child policy, a ban on immigration and shifting the poor north should fix that. I would make a fine UKIP MP.



You have to be some sort of a cunt to be an MP, so...


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 18, 2014)

SarfLondoner said:


> Do the policy makers/government have any interest in bringing the boom to an end?



Of course they don't.
Deflate the house price bubble and you undermine the economy, due to the economy's dependence on personal debt rather than production of goods or services.


----------



## SarfLondoner (May 18, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> Of course they don't.
> Deflate the house price bubble and you undermine the economy, due to the economy's dependence on personal debt rather than production of goods or services.


I should have added due to personal gain to my sentence.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 19, 2014)

SarfLondoner said:


> I should have added due to personal gain to my sentence.



Personal gain and political gain, unfortunately - a powerful combination for a lot of those greedheads.


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (May 20, 2014)

technical said:


> Wasn't sure which thread to put this in - apologies if someone has already posted this link, but excellent article in yesterday's Guardian about the redevelopment of the Woodberry Down estate in Hackney.
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/society/...tion-how-woodberry-down-became-woodberry-park



*The truth about gentrification: regeneration or con trick?*
*http://www.theguardian.com/society/...tion-how-woodberry-down-became-woodberry-park*
It's a very good article, ought to be on this thread as well.


----------



## technical (May 20, 2014)

Wonder which estate in Brixton it is that's mentioned at the end of that article - Myatt's Fields/Cressingham Gardens?


----------



## trabuquera (May 20, 2014)

My apologies if this has already been posted in other thread(s) - some inside dirt on the Brixton gated development, including horrific prices and painfully small sq footage... http://www.theguardian.com/money/20...-streets-carney-yorkshire-london-bank-england

(The Brixton stuff is the latter half. Takeaway: half a mill for a shonky cramped  newbuild one bedroomer. argh.)


----------



## ddraig (May 20, 2014)

from that link


> Adrian Burch, manager of the local branch of agents Haart has just sold another flat in Carney Place. He won't say what it went for, only that it was significantly higher than the £400,000 asking price. "The client [seller] had bought it off-plan and it suited them to sell now," he says, adding that when the development was first marketed 18 months ago, one-bedroom flats were sold for as little as £220,000.
> 
> Burch says the scale of the Carney Place gains is not unusual. "That kind of increase isn't isolated to there at all. I was at a valuation yesterday for an ex-council flat which two years ago I'd put at £180,000 to £190,000. Yesterday I valued it at £290,000."


I realise some people have more money than sense and some of this is down to far away investment but how can anyone think they will make money on something that has already increased in price that much?


----------



## leanderman (May 20, 2014)

ddraig said:


> from that link
> 
> I realise some people have more money than sense and some of this is down to far away investment but how can anyone think they will make money on something that has already increased in price that much?



but, somehow, inexplicably, it always does increase in price again and again.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 20, 2014)

leanderman said:


> but, somehow, inexplicably, it always does increase in price again and again.



With several instances of price plateaus and even falls along the way, in amongst the rises.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 20, 2014)

ddraig said:


> from that link
> 
> I realise some people have more money than sense and some of this is down to far away investment but how can anyone think they will make money on something that has already increased in price that much?



Because we're currently in a property price bubble across 50-60% of the UK, and until the bubble either bursts or is deflated through policy, speculators will continue to benefit from that bubble.


----------



## leanderman (May 20, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> With several instances of price plateaus and even falls along the way, in amongst the rises.



Would be interesting to see historical house prices plotted against a measure of inflation. 

Beer was cheap once


----------



## Strangerdanger (May 20, 2014)

trabuquera said:


> My apologies if this has already been posted in other thread(s) - some inside dirt on the Brixton gated development, including horrific prices and painfully small sq footage... http://www.theguardian.com/money/20...-streets-carney-yorkshire-london-bank-england
> 
> (The Brixton stuff is the latter half. Takeaway: half a mill for a shonky cramped  newbuild one bedroomer. argh.)



My new build is neither shonky nor cramped.


----------



## trabuquera (May 20, 2014)

Strangerdanger said:


> My new build is neither shonky nor cramped.


I'm not saying yours is either (my my, touchy touchy.) the one described in the link above is both.


----------



## Strangerdanger (May 20, 2014)

trabuquera said:


> I'm not saying yours is either (my my, touchy touchy.) the one described in the link above is both.


lol, point taken.

But seriously, it is quite scary. I mean, judging by recent sales the value of our flat has increased quite a bit and we've only been here 7 months. It means nothing unless we want to sell up and move out of London, and we don't. We probably can't afford anything bigger or more central as all the values of those flats have gone up as well, and meanwhile those not on the property ladder will find it harder and harder to get on. What's the point? It's not really good news for anyone....except landlords I guess.


----------



## leanderman (May 20, 2014)

Strangerdanger said:


> We're so clearly in a bubble, funny thing
> 
> lol, point taken.
> 
> But seriously, it is quite scary. I mean, judging by recent sales the value of our flat has increased quite a bit and we've only been here 7 months. It means nothing unless we want to sell up and move out of London, and we don't. We probably can't afford anything bigger or more central as all the values of those flats have gone up as well, and meanwhile those not on the property ladder will find it harder and harder to get on. What's the point? It's not really good news for anyone....except landlords I guess.



So true. This is good only for owners of multiple properties, or properties at the top of the ladder.


----------



## teuchter (May 20, 2014)

Or people who want to move out of London.


----------



## leanderman (May 20, 2014)

teuchter said:


> Or people who want to move out of London.



never!


----------



## CH1 (May 20, 2014)

One bedroom flat Connaught Mansions: £390,000 anyone?
Does have a roof terrace, but if this is a realistic price things are motoring there. Not long ago Connaught Mansions flats fetched under £200,000.
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-46393808.html


----------



## colacubes (May 20, 2014)

CH1 said:


> One bedroom flat Connaught Mansions: £390,000 anyone?
> Does have a roof terrace, but if this is a realistic price things are motoring there. Not long ago Connaught Mansions flats fetched under £200,000.
> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-46393808.html



Tbf, Connaught Mansions properties were well above my budget at nearly £200,000 when I bought my flat 10 years ago.  £390,000 is a lot, but not that extreme a rise in the greater scheme of things round here.


----------



## Belushi (May 20, 2014)

39 sq metres! I'd want a lot more space for 390K


----------



## CH1 (May 20, 2014)

Belushi said:


> 39 sq metres! I'd want a lot more space for 390K


I live in a similar sized flat in Effra Court for over 6 years - but I used to go out a lot in those days!


----------



## teuchter (May 20, 2014)

Belushi said:


> 39 sq metres! I'd want a lot more space for 390K


Want doesn't get.


----------



## leanderman (May 20, 2014)

CH1 said:


> One bedroom flat Connaught Mansions: £390,000 anyone?
> Does have a roof terrace, but if this is a realistic price things are motoring there. Not long ago Connaught Mansions flats fetched under £200,000.
> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-46393808.html



And the 'open house' scam to whip up a frenzy among would-be buyers


----------



## equationgirl (May 20, 2014)

leanderman said:


> And the 'open house' scam to whip up a frenzy among would-be buyers


Which is strictly by appointment, so hardly an open house at all.


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (May 24, 2014)

One of the skinniest houses in the country, measuring a mere 99 inches wide, is on the market for £450,000.
http://www.homesandproperty.co.uk/p...skinniest-house-measuring-99-inches-wide-sale


----------



## CH1 (May 24, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> One of the skinniest houses in the country, measuring a mere 99 inches wide, is on the market for £450,000.
> http://www.homesandproperty.co.uk/p...skinniest-house-measuring-99-inches-wide-sale


Under offer this morning according to Foxton's website: http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?bed...orm=keyword&search_type=SS&submit_type=search

Now where's that guy who gives us the low-down on floorspace?


----------



## Manter (May 24, 2014)

CH1 said:


> Under offer this morning according to Foxton's website: http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?bed...orm=keyword&search_type=SS&submit_type=search
> 
> Now where's that guy who gives us the low-down on floorspace?


In a damp field with three crates of wine, I believe


----------



## Manter (May 24, 2014)

I am trapped under a sleeping baby and cat so am reading the property websites. I have been in this house, and the rooms are nowhere near this size. What odd photography. http://mobile.beresfordresidential.com/Property/Residential/for-sale/Brixton/Hillworth-Road/B1S252s

E2a this one is substantially nicer, bigger, on an arguably better road, and cheaper 
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-43861129.html


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Jun 8, 2014)

Why Brixton is the place of choice for young Londoners by not Foxtons estate agents.
http://www.edenharper.com/news/why-brixton-is-the-place-of-choice-for-young-londoners

Second sentence "vibrance" klaxxon, edgy replaced by "energy".


----------



## CH1 (Jun 8, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> Why Brixton is the place of choice for young Londoners by not Foxtons estate agents.
> http://www.edenharper.com/news/why-brixton-is-the-place-of-choice-for-young-londoners
> 
> Second sentence "vibrance" klaxxon, edgy replaced by "energy".


Tastefully written up by a (literally) semi-local agent.

Meanwhile I was worried the fizz was going out of the Brixton market (and Foxtons)- until I saw this one
http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/33360777

Leanderman?


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Jun 8, 2014)

CH1 said:


> Tastefully written up by a (literally) semi-local agent.
> 
> Meanwhile I was worried the fizz was going out of the Brixton market (and Foxtons)- until I saw this one
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/33360777
> ...



Wow, is it any wonder why the rich live longer? Their quality of life is from another world.


----------



## ibilly99 (Jun 8, 2014)

Dexter Deadwood said:


> Wow, is it any wonder why the rich live longer? Their quality of life is from another world.



You could hold a festival in that garden , stages (more than one) campsite and all.


----------



## ChrisSouth (Jun 9, 2014)

CH1 said:


> Under offer this morning according to Foxton's website: http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?bed...orm=keyword&search_type=SS&submit_type=search
> 
> Now where's that guy who gives us the low-down on floorspace?



It bizarrely has a Lib Dems winning here poster in the window. Not really a selling point is it?


----------



## leanderman (Jun 9, 2014)

ChrisSouth said:


> It bizarrely has a Lib Dems winning here poster in the window. Not really a selling point is it?



£965sq ft


----------



## leanderman (Jun 9, 2014)

CH1 said:


> Tastefully written up by a (literally) semi-local agent.
> 
> Meanwhile I was worried the fizz was going out of the Brixton market (and Foxtons)- until I saw this one
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/33360777
> ...



£330,000 in 1998 - now £2,950,000!


----------



## boohoo (Jun 9, 2014)

leanderman said:


> £330,000 in 1998 - now £2,950,000!



If you can't afford that, there is a cheaper one across the road:

http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/33376935


----------



## Rushy (Jun 9, 2014)

leanderman said:


> £330,000 in 1998 - now £2,950,000!


£1,400 / sqft



boohoo said:


> If you can't afford that, there is a cheaper one across the road:
> 
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/33376935


£660/sqft
I know which I'd choose!


----------



## boohoo (Jun 9, 2014)

I have been in one of the Georgian house on that road - they do feel a little small.


----------



## leanderman (Jun 9, 2014)

boohoo said:


> I have been in one of the Georgian house on that road - they do feel a little small.



Apparently 2,100sq ft, which is about the size of Victorian houses in this street, if maxed out (loft etc)


----------



## Manter (Jun 9, 2014)

CH1 said:


> Tastefully written up by a (literally) semi-local agent.
> 
> Meanwhile I was worried the fizz was going out of the Brixton market (and Foxtons)- until I saw this one
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/33360777
> ...


that's rather nice…. but that's the Stockwell conservation district, that has always been a bit out of this world.


----------



## boohoo (Jun 9, 2014)

Manter said:


> that's rather nice…. but that's the Stockwell conservation district, that has always been a bit out of this world.



There are some beautiful houses in the surrounding streets (quite a few are housing association) I grew up on that road in a council house which happens to be a Victorian house.


----------



## Manter (Jun 9, 2014)

boohoo said:


> There are some beautiful houses in the surrounding streets (quite a few are housing association) I grew up on that road in a council house which happens to be a Victorian house.


I think you've said before that some of the other house dwellers' kids were a bit of a nightmare at times


----------



## boohoo (Jun 9, 2014)

Manter said:


> I think you've said before that some of the other house dwellers' kids were a bit of a nightmare at times


Yes!  Although the houses look nice I do wander about how much repair they need. There has been dry rot in my parents place twice as well as the ceiling falling in the living room and the bathroom. Is this just general wear and tear?


----------



## Manter (Jun 9, 2014)

boohoo said:


> Yes!  Although the houses look nice I do wander about how much repair they need. There has been dry rot in my parents place twice as well as the ceiling falling in the living room and the bathroom. Is this just general wear and tear?


well, old houses do drink money (she says a little bitterly) but the ones I've seen (we looked at a couple when we were buying and I know people who live in 2 up there) have had a lot of money spent on the boring but essential stuff.  You can see the logic of the councils ditching beautiful old housing stock in favour of new build in the 70s and 80s…. the beautiful old houses take a lot of time and money to stay that way.  Though the second of the houses in the links looks like it may not have had the required work done   As well as having carpet in the bathroom <<boak>>


----------



## leanderman (Jun 9, 2014)

boohoo said:


> There are some beautiful houses in the surrounding streets (quite a few are housing association) I grew up on that road in a council house which happens to be a Victorian house.



Ran through there last week. Some amazing stuff around Landsdowne Gardens too


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 9, 2014)

Manter said:


> well, old houses do drink money (she says a little bitterly) but the ones I've seen (we looked at a couple when we were buying and I know people who live in 2 up there) have had a lot of money spent on the boring but essential stuff.  You can see the logic of the councils ditching beautiful old housing stock in favour of new build in the 70s and 80s…. the beautiful old houses take a lot of time and money to stay that way.  Though the second of the houses in the links looks like it may not have had the required work done   As well as having carpet in the bathroom <<boak>>


The two smaller bedrooms shown look like the water has come in through the ceilings at some point.


----------



## Cowley (Jun 10, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Ran through there last week. Some amazing stuff around Landsdowne Gardens too


 
Aye, I was brought up in Stockwell, there are loads of nice parts to it, Durand Gardens and Albert Square are two really nice bits, Albert Square is probably the nicest part of Stockwell. The Houses there are ridiculous.


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Jun 10, 2014)

When i was a kid i used to walk along Stockwell Park Crescent on the way to school. Always thought the houses there were posh.


----------



## Rushy (Jun 10, 2014)

Cowley said:


> Aye, I was brought up in Stockwell, there are loads of nice parts to it, Durand Gardens and Albert Square are two really nice bits, Albert Square is probably the nicest part of Stockwell. The Houses there are ridiculous.


Roger Moore was born in a flat in Albert Square.


----------



## Cowley (Jun 12, 2014)

Rushy said:


> Roger Moore was born in a flat in Albert Square.


 
Joanna Lumley lives on Albert Square so I am told.


----------



## Rushy (Jun 12, 2014)

Cowley said:


> Joanna Lumley lives on Albert Square so I am told.


Yes! That's true too. Or was 15yrs ago. Friends used to see her quite regularly.


----------



## snowy_again (Jun 12, 2014)

Buscador and I always used to nose at her whilst she was shopping in the Vauxhall Sainsbury's.


----------



## Manter (Jun 12, 2014)

Rushy said:


> Yes! That's true too. Or was 15yrs ago. Friends used to see her quite regularly.


Still true. She's lived there for about 20 years iirc. Met her at a drinks party, she was absolutely charming. Wicked laugh too


----------



## cuppa tee (Jun 13, 2014)

Rushy said:


> Yes! That's true too. Or was 15yrs ago. Friends used to see her quite regularly.


IIRC she lives/lived on Durand Gardens, Greta Scaacchi lived on Albert Square, and so did I


----------



## Rushy (Jun 13, 2014)

cuppa tee said:


> IIRC she lives/lived on Durand Gardens, Greta Scaacchi lived on Albert Square, and so did I


I think your memory may be hazy. About where JL lives, that is. I've no idea where you lived or how hazy your memory is on that subject.


----------



## cuppa tee (Jun 13, 2014)

Rushy said:


> I think your memory may be hazy. About where JL lives, that is. I've no idea where you lived or how hazy your memory is on that subject.


a quick search tells me she has a drum on Albert Sqare ......but she definitely lived on Durand Gardens, my contacts in "the industry" told me..........maybe she moved


----------



## Rushy (Jun 13, 2014)

cuppa tee said:


> a quick search tells me she has a drum on Albert Sqare ......but she definitely lived on Durand Gardens, my contacts in "the industry" told me..........maybe she moved



The first page of that same search should have brought up a 2011 interview in which she says she has lived in the same house in Stockwell for over 20 years. And another interview in 2001 in which she says she has lived in the area for 11 years, i.e. moved into the area in 1990. I think your "contacts in the industry" may be confused, dahlink.

James Bond went to Durand Gardens school though. And he hung out at the Brockwell Lido.


----------



## cuppa tee (Jun 13, 2014)

Rushy said:


> The first page of that same search should have brought up a 2011 interview in which she says she has lived in the same house in Stockwell for over 20 years. And another interview in 2001 in which she says she has lived in the area for 11 years, i.e. moved into the area in 1990. I think your "contacts in the industry" may be confused, dahlink.



lol, she was just trying to put paparazzi and autograph hunters off the scent,  btw pogo pattersons [from grange hill] mum used to have the Prince Of Wales in cleaver square and denis healey played the piano there often



> Bond went to Durand Gardens school though. And he hung out at the Brockwell Lido.



obviously because the dinky winky pouch had not yet been invented


----------



## Rushy (Jun 13, 2014)

cuppa tee said:


> lol, she was just trying to put paparazzi and autograph hunters off the scent,





cuppa tee said:


> btw pogo pattersons [from grange hill] mum used to have the Prince Of Wales in cleaver square and denis healey played the piano there often


Only been in there two or three times (after court!) but lovely pub. Pogo may be before I came to UK - no idea who he is!


----------



## technical (Jun 13, 2014)

Knowledge of Grange Hill characters and plots should be made part of the citizenship test - you must know who Tucker Jenkins was?!


----------



## Rushy (Jun 13, 2014)

technical said:


> Knowledge of Grange Hill characters and plots should be made part of the citizenship test - you must know who Tucker Jenkins was?!


Yes , I do!
And Sammo and Rolly.


----------



## Manter (Jun 13, 2014)

I don't and I'm British


----------



## boohoo (Jun 13, 2014)

Rushy said:


> The first page of that same search should have brought up a 2011 interview in which she says she has lived in the same house in Stockwell for over 20 years. And another interview in 2001 in which she says she has lived in the area for 11 years, i.e. moved into the area in 1990. I think your "contacts in the industry" may be confused, dahlink.
> 
> James Bond went to Durand Gardens school though. And he hung out at the Brockwell Lido.



Roger Moore went to Durand when it was Hackford Boys at the time. As an ex-Durand pupil I don't think it's ever been called Durand Gardens School.


----------



## boohoo (Jun 13, 2014)

Manter said:


> I don't and I'm British



Who was on it when you watched it?


----------



## Manter (Jun 13, 2014)

boohoo said:


> Who was on it when you watched it?


I never did. Very, very little tv in my childhood


----------



## boohoo (Jun 13, 2014)

Manter said:


> I never did. Very, very little tv in my childhood


Was that out of choice or you weren't interested in it? We didn't have a TV til I was 8 so I think I got quite into it (well as much as my parents would let me)


----------



## Belushi (Jun 13, 2014)

Rushy said:


> Yes , I do!
> And Sammo and Rolly.



Roland! No one ever called him Rolly!

Ro-land is acceptable if you're a stalky little West Indian girl.


----------



## Manter (Jun 13, 2014)

boohoo said:


> Was that out of choice or you weren't interested in it? We didn't have a TV til I was 8 so I think I got quite into it (well as much as my parents would let me)


We weren't allowed much, so we found other stuff to do, then when the restrictions on what we could watch were relaxed, we weren't interested because we had other interests. 

It's one of the reasons I'm so odd


----------



## boohoo (Jun 13, 2014)

Manter said:


> We weren't allowed much, so we found other stuff to do, then when the restrictions on what we could watch were relaxed, we weren't interested because we had other interests.
> 
> It's one of the reasons I'm so odd



I think some of the things we watched - like Harold Lloyd, Laurel and Hardy and Charlie Chaplin, fueled my interest in early cinema. And there were lots of other movies such as all the old musicals that I still love today.


----------



## buscador (Jun 13, 2014)

Manter said:


> We weren't allowed much, so we found other stuff to do, then when the restrictions on what we could watch were relaxed, we weren't interested because we had other interests.
> 
> It's one of the reasons I'm so odd



Was one of your restrictions commercial telly? Or telly while it was still daylight? 

I have huge gaps in my "cultural landscape" as a result.


----------



## Rushy (Jun 13, 2014)

boohoo said:


> Roger Moore went to Durand when it was Hackford Boys at the time. As an ex-Durand pupil I don't think it's ever been called Durand Gardens School.


Im sure you're right. I just meant that school there! Ages since I read his biog. First part is great. Then gets a bit lovey. And very polite. Never finished it.


----------



## Manter (Jun 13, 2014)

buscador said:


> Was one of your restrictions commercial telly? Or telly while it was still daylight?
> 
> I have huge gaps in my "cultural landscape" as a result.


there were things we were allowed to watch- some children's TV, news, sport, nature programmes, documentaries, but a restriction on amount.  Certain number of hours a week, can't remember which.  Soap operas were emphatically not allowed. I've never been bothered by not having seen Eldorado or byker grove or whatever- apart from my teenage years when I went through a tediously predictable hating my parents stage.


----------



## leanderman (Jun 15, 2014)

Bit of evidence suggesting house prices have stopped rising - and may even be dropping.

This is a good thing. 

May reflect tighter lending rules, rate fears etc


----------



## mxh (Jun 15, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Bit of evidence suggesting house prices have stopped rising - and may even be dropping.
> 
> This is a good thing.
> 
> May reflect tighter lending rules, rate fears etc



Evidence?

Rate rises and tougher lending rules will help reduce prices. What about foreign buyers, are they effected?


----------



## leanderman (Jun 15, 2014)

mxh said:


> Evidence?
> 
> Rate rises and tougher lending rules will help reduce prices. What about foreign buyers, are they effected?



Just a string of newspaper stories such as this: http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/h...-rate-rise-9534858.html?origin=internalSearch


----------



## uk benzo (Jun 15, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Bit of evidence suggesting house prices have stopped rising - and may even be dropping.
> 
> This is a good thing.
> 
> May reflect tighter lending rules, rate fears etc



I agree. A few places in herne hill that were put on market at crazy prices have dropped by up to 20%. Good. These Fucks trying to pass a cupboard as a third bedroom deserve to get shafted.


----------



## mxh (Jun 15, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Just a string of newspaper stories such as this: http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/h...-rate-rise-9534858.html?origin=internalSearch


It's about time the market hit the top so it can start to go the other way.

Although house prices stopped making any sense to me a long time ago.


----------



## mxh (Jun 15, 2014)

uk benzo said:


> I agree. A few places in herne hill that were put on market at crazy prices have dropped by up to 20%. Good. These Fucks trying to pass a cupboard as a third bedroom deserve to get shafted.



20% is quite steep. Seems like the old Foxtons tactic of overpricing to get the instruction, tying the vendor in for 2 or 3 months and then persuading the vendor to drop to a more realistic value.


----------



## Mr Retro (Jun 15, 2014)

mxh said:


> It's about time the market hit the top so it can start to go the other way.


The London market will never hit the top and start going the other way. The heat might come out of it in the short term but medium to long term prices will rise well ahead of inflation.


----------



## leanderman (Jun 15, 2014)

mxh said:


> 20% is quite steep.



But there may be something in it. 

Sister-in-law was told three weeks ago she could name her price for her flat by Brockwell Park.

A week after it went on sale, an 'open house' event has been cancelled through lack of interest and just one inquiry has been made.

Things seem to have changed very quickly.


----------



## nagapie (Jun 15, 2014)

Damn, I am dropping working hours in October and I was hoping to get my remortgage done while the prices were stupid.


----------



## Rushy (Jun 15, 2014)

leanderman said:


> But there may be something in it.
> 
> Sister-in-law was told three weeks ago she could name her price for her flat by Brockwell Park.
> 
> ...


It is always the way. It's never a straight run upwards and the peaks and troughs along the way will often be quite large even though the annual figures disguise this. London annual figures between 96 and 2007 don't show any negative growth periods (that I remember, not significant ones anyway) but there were some fairly big drops and spurts. If you think about it, prices went up maybe 30% in a short period months recently but a sudden drop of 10% would still show 20% annualised growth. A slow down in June is very normal and usually picks up again in September. The less inspiring first floor 2 beds which have been breaching the 500K mark in a frothy market will be hard hit - maybe more than 10% - and then slowly catch up again.


----------



## leanderman (Jun 16, 2014)

Rushy said:


> It is always the way. It's never a straight run upwards and the peaks and troughs along the way will often be quite large even though the annual figures disguise this. London annual figures between 96 and 2007 don't show any negative growth periods (that I remember, not significant ones anyway) but there were some fairly big drops and spurts. If you think about it, prices went up maybe 30% in a short period months recently but a sudden drop of 10% would still show 20% annualised growth. A slow down in June is very normal and usually picks up again in September. The less inspiring first floor 2 beds which have been breaching the 500K mark in a frothy market will be hard hit - maybe more than 10% - and then slowly catch up again.



Good analysis.

Precisely describes my sister-in-law's place.


----------



## Smick (Jun 16, 2014)

Rushy said:


> It is always the way. It's never a straight run upwards and the peaks and troughs along the way will often be quite large even though the annual figures disguise this. London annual figures between 96 and 2007 don't show any negative growth periods (that I remember, not significant ones anyway) but there were some fairly big drops and spurts. If you think about it, prices went up maybe 30% in a short period months recently but a sudden drop of 10% would still show 20% annualised growth. A slow down in June is very normal and usually picks up again in September. The less inspiring first floor 2 beds which have been breaching the 500K mark in a frothy market will be hard hit - maybe more than 10% - and then slowly catch up again.


 
If, as often alluded to here, the Brixton Hill crazy prices are influenced by school catchment, is there a seasonality to the prices?

I have heard anecdotes of people buying near Sudbourne, leaving the flat empty, getting their child in, selling up, pocketing £100k in the process.

If there is any truth in this, I'd imagine that there will be additional supply after school places are offered. We're in that period now.


----------



## leanderman (Jun 16, 2014)

Smick said:


> If, as often alluded to here, the Brixton Hill crazy prices are influenced by school catchment, is there a seasonality to the prices?
> 
> I have heard anecdotes of people buying near Sudbourne, leaving the flat empty, getting their child in, selling up, pocketing £100k in the process.
> 
> If there is any truth in this, I'd imagine that there will be additional supply after school places are offered. We're in that period now.



Kids been at the school five years and I have never heard this. 

Temporary renting happens though. May have done it myself.


----------



## uk benzo (Jun 16, 2014)

Only Liberace could feel comfortable in a place like this:

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-44831911.html


----------



## Smick (Jun 16, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Kids been at the school five years and I have never heard this.
> 
> Temporary renting happens though. May have done it myself.


 
I have had two different people tell me the same story, but as ever, it's a friend of a friend. Pub talk.

But if someone had bought a flat in the catchment area in early 2013 for entry in 2014/15, and is selling now, I'd imagine they'd be quids in.


----------



## Rushy (Jun 16, 2014)

Smick said:


> But if someone had bought a flat _anywhere in the general London _area in early 2013 and _for whatever reason _is selling now, I'd imagine they'd be quids in.



Much simpler to look at it like this ^.


----------



## Rushy (Jun 16, 2014)

uk benzo said:


> Only Liberace could feel comfortable in a place like this:
> 
> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-44831911.html


Ha! I was admiring it. Pretty sure that I did some Swing or Salsa in that hall when I first moved here (and developed an irrational fear of women who frequent Swing and Salsa nights).


----------



## leanderman (Jun 16, 2014)

Smick said:


> I have had two different people tell me the same story, but as ever, it's a friend of a friend. Pub talk.
> 
> But if someone had bought a flat in the catchment area in early 2013 for entry in 2014/15, and is selling now, I'd imagine they'd be quids in.



Yep. I think people are much more likely to simply lie about their address. 

The document and address checks are much tighter this year.


----------



## cuppa tee (Jun 16, 2014)

Rushy said:


> Ha! I was admiring it. Pretty sure that I did some Swing or Salsa in that hall when I first moved here (and developed an irrational fear of women who frequent Swing and Salsa nights).


Ah yes, the old Loughborough Hotel, I had some raucous nights there, a good example of the evils of gentrification that a space that was the venue for
fun and games for many is now only for someone with sufficient funds to buy the place, maybe someone like the bloke behind me in the queue for that venue
who felt standing in line with the _hoi-polloi _to gain entry was beneath a man who held a position of stature in HM government...........


----------



## el-ahrairah (Jun 16, 2014)

uk benzo said:


> Only Liberace could feel comfortable in a place like this:
> 
> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-44831911.html


 
well call me liberace then because i'd buy that today if i could.


----------



## Crispy (Jun 16, 2014)

That's a spectacular space and a crying shame it's not a pub


----------



## Manter (Jun 16, 2014)

uk benzo said:


> Only Liberace could feel comfortable in a place like this:
> 
> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-44831911.html


Wow. What a shame it's been converted into flats. But I reckon that could be amazing with some redecoration. The main space is stunning.


----------



## Rushy (Jun 16, 2014)

I'm surprised it's not on for more. I know £700K is a lot but there are some pretty average places hitting that figure and this is pretty unique. Can't quite make out if those bedroom spaces are actually enclosed though - looks like they are not. In which case it is a "huge" studio flat.


----------



## Manter (Jun 16, 2014)

Rushy said:


> I'm surprised it's not on for more. I know £700K is a lot but there are some pretty average places hitting that figure and this is pretty unique. Can't quite make out if those bedroom spaces are actually enclosed though - looks like they are not. In which case it is a "huge" studio flat.


Unique might be the problem. You won't (probably) end up with people competing for it like you would for something less dramatic


----------



## shakespearegirl (Jun 16, 2014)

Are all the bedroom open to the main space, that is what the photos look like, not much privacy for that price!


----------



## Manter (Jun 16, 2014)

shakespearegirl said:


> Are all the bedroom open to the main space, that is what the photos look like, not much privacy for that price!


Looks like it from the floor plan


----------



## Greebo (Jun 16, 2014)

el-ahrairah said:


> well call me liberace then because i'd buy that today if i could.


So would I, except that it'd need very expensive work so that VP could get to the upper level, and the bathrooms would have to be adapted.  But get rid of the furnishings, and replace with plainer stuff, then the ceiling etc would seem less fussy.


----------



## leanderman (Jun 16, 2014)

Smick said:


> I have had two different people tell me the same story, but as ever, it's a friend of a friend. Pub talk.



Silly me - you are right. A developer with kids has done this - twice in the same prime road. Bought one place, did it up, doubled up by selling, moved across street and did the same. School place now secured they are renting miles outside catchment and awaiting a crash with a stack of cash. 

Even better, no capital gains tax to pay as each sale was the main family home. 

Better still, neither property apparently came on to the open market and both bought at knockdown prices. One a distressed probate sale.


----------



## el-ahrairah (Jun 16, 2014)

Greebo said:


> So would I, except that it'd need very expensive work so that VP could get to the upper level, and the bathrooms would have to be adapted.  But get rid of the furnishings, and replace with plainer stuff, then the ceiling etc would seem less fussy.


 
so everything about that place is perfect for you except the layout and the decor?


----------



## Winot (Jun 16, 2014)

el-ahrairah said:


> so everything about that place is perfect for you except the layout and the decor?



And the price.


----------



## Greebo (Jun 16, 2014)

el-ahrairah said:


> so everything about that place is perfect for you except the layout and the decor?


It's got potential, light, and plenty of bookspace.   *adds to the "when I'm rich" list*


----------



## astral (Jun 16, 2014)

I think it's gorgeous.  Not so keen on the open plan bedrooms, but the space and the height and ALL THE BOOKSHELVES.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 16, 2014)

cuppa tee said:


> Ah yes, the old Loughborough Hotel, I had some raucous nights there, a good example of the evils of gentrification that a space that was the venue for
> fun and games for many is now only for someone with sufficient funds to buy the place, maybe someone like the bloke behind me in the queue for that venue
> who felt standing in line with the _hoi-polloi _to gain entry was beneath a man who held a position of stature in HM government...........



...fucking Mandelson and his "do you know who I am?".


----------



## Rushy (Jun 16, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Silly me - you are right. A developer with kids has done this - twice in the same prime road. Bought one place, did it up, doubled up by selling, moved across street and did the same. School place now secured they are renting miles outside catchment and awaiting a crash with a stack of cash.
> 
> Even better, no capital gains tax to pay as each sale was the main family home.
> 
> Better still, neither property apparently came on to the open market and both bought at knockdown prices. One a distressed probate sale.


Is Leander Road inside the catchment area? I'm way closer and only within it in exceptional years, from what I've been told.

ETA- just saw your other post.


----------



## Manter (Jun 16, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Kids been at the school five years and I have never heard this.
> 
> Temporary renting happens though. May have done it myself.


----------



## leanderman (Jun 16, 2014)

Rushy said:


> Is Leander Road inside the catchment area? I'm way closer and only within it in exceptional years, from what I've been told.
> 
> ETA- just saw your other post.



It was in catchment six years ago. But that was unusual. 

The school's reputation and demographic changes have shrunk catchment to about 200m. 

It'll expand as the school doubles in size next year.


----------



## MrSki (Jun 16, 2014)

Crispy said:


> That's a spectacular space and a crying shame it's not a pub


It used to be my local.


----------



## Rushy (Jun 16, 2014)

leanderman said:


> It was in catchment six years ago. But that was unusual.
> 
> The school's reputation and demographic changes have shrunk catchment to about 200m.
> 
> It'll expand as the school doubles in size next year.



According to Google Maps I'm 267m as the crow flies .
Luckily, it's not really all that urgent .


----------



## leanderman (Jun 16, 2014)

And all this means the degree of social segregation at Sudbourne is approaching that at Corpus Christi (in terms of free school meal rates)


----------



## leanderman (Jun 16, 2014)

Rushy said:


> According to Google Maps I'm 267m as the crow flies .
> Luckily, it's not really all that urgent .



That'll be in, post expansion.


----------



## Rushy (Jun 16, 2014)

leanderman said:


> That'll be in, post expansion.


Post expansion the new flats on the Olive Morris site will probably take up all the places!

I think I'll start my own free-school in the shed.


----------



## leanderman (Jun 16, 2014)

Rushy said:


> Post expansion the new flats on the Olive Morris site will probably take up all the places!
> 
> I think I'll start my own free-school in the shed.



Yes. I wonder about that Olive Morris thing. Bound to be targeted by young families. 

Gove will find you the money I am sure.


----------



## Winot (Jun 16, 2014)

Rushy said:


> According to Google Maps I'm 267m as the crow flies .
> Luckily, it's not really all that urgent .



9 months?



leanderman said:


> That'll be in, *post expansion*.


----------



## Rushy (Jun 16, 2014)

Winot said:


> 9 months?


I bloody hope not .


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 16, 2014)

uk benzo said:


> Only Liberace could feel comfortable in a place like this:
> 
> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-44831911.html


I think it's amazing. I'd buy it if I had the money and if they left all the furniture and decor.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 16, 2014)

Manter said:


> Wow. What a shame it's been converted into flats. But I reckon that could be amazing with some redecoration. The main space is stunning.


it's perfect as it is! I want that house! I wonder who it belongs to.


----------



## gaijingirl (Jun 16, 2014)

uk benzo said:


> Only Liberace could feel comfortable in a place like this:
> 
> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-44831911.html



oh I had some good nights there... shame it's not a pub anymore..


----------



## mxh (Jun 16, 2014)

gaijingirl said:


> oh I had some good nights there... shame it's not a pub anymore..



Looks great, a bit too much going on in the décor for my taste. Not in my price bracket, but 800k does not sound that excessive compared to some prices out there now.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 16, 2014)

uk benzo said:


> Only Liberace could feel comfortable in a place like this:
> 
> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-44831911.html


That place is just bizarre - open plan bedrooms? And I can't get a feel for how big the 'rooms' are suppose to be because there's so much clutter in each photograph. I would say quite overpriced at £800k too.


----------



## Cowley (Jun 17, 2014)

equationgirl said:


> That place is just bizarre - open plan bedrooms? And I can't get a feel for how big the 'rooms' are suppose to be because there's so much clutter in each photograph. I would say quite overpriced at £800k too.


 
Yeah it's kind of too weird. I do like what they have done to it decor wise, it's kind of bonkers...but the layout with the open plan bedrooms is just not right...they will have major problems shifting it IMHO.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 17, 2014)

I think it's the ideal place for a cult. A cu*l*t.
Ideal for a first time buyer before they move on to bigger things


----------



## trabuquera (Jun 17, 2014)

A voyeuristic cult where nothing can be done out of sight of any other member.
(yes it's just envious sneering, I'd live there like a shot if I had 800k to mess about with .... but still, I HATE mezzanine bedrooms. what is the point? if you're not going for walls, you might as well all just sleep on the one bearskin rug by the fireplace imho.)


----------



## buscador (Jun 17, 2014)

I'd live in that place. I'd probably be living on my own though.


----------



## Crispy (Jun 17, 2014)

It must have been altered by the current owner. The original planning application drawings from 2004 show enclosed bedrooms.


----------



## shakespearegirl (Jun 17, 2014)

I'd love that house, but would only be comfortable living there with my husband, you couldn't have flatmates/guests and still have any privacy


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 17, 2014)

shakespearegirl said:


> I'd love that house, but would only be comfortable living there with my husband, you couldn't have flatmates/guests and still have any privacy


that's why it needs to be a cult. imma gonna start a cult


----------



## Vibrant-Hubb (Jun 17, 2014)

In the late eighties that space was brielfy a gay club called "The Dome".  I was about 23 and all I remember is a boy I liked having a sailor hat with "Captain Spunky" written on it. We were all very spunky in those days. The ceiling was painted black I think. Then it was the Mambo Inn, famous for extremely randy straight blokes shoving their erections up aganist girls while "teaching them Salsa".  Seems a pity that such a communal, happy space is now just a flat.


----------



## ash (Jun 17, 2014)

I 


Vibrant-Hubb said:


> In the late eighties that space was brielfy a gay club called "The Dome".  I was about 23 and all I remember is a boy I liked having a sailor hat with "Captain Spunky" written on it. We were all very spunky in those days. The ceiling was painted black I think. Then it was the Mambo Inn, famous for extremely randy straight blokes shoving their erections up aganist girls while "teaching them Salsa".  Seems a pity that such a communal, happy space is now just a flat.


didn't realise it was the Mambo Inn- I really want to live there now


----------



## teuchter (Jun 20, 2014)

If a domed ceiling is too much for you then this one is a little more restrained.

 

http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/33550323


----------



## Belushi (Jun 20, 2014)

Jesus, thats horrible.


----------



## Rushy (Jun 20, 2014)

teuchter said:


> If a domed ceiling is too much for you then this one is a little more restrained.
> 
> View attachment 56183
> 
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/33550323


I bet they've made some interesting niche films in there.


----------



## Manter (Jun 20, 2014)

Belushi said:


> Jesus, thats horrible.


it really is


----------



## Manter (Jun 20, 2014)

Incidentally its a really really nasty estate too.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 20, 2014)

Manter said:


> Incidentally its a really really nasty estate too.


How so?


----------



## Manter (Jun 20, 2014)

teuchter said:


> How so?


Crime, mostly.  There are a lot of competing gangs (and opposing sides in various civil wars) dumped there with limited support.  Some of the stock is in pretty bad condition, I was involved in trying to clean up a couple of flats that had vulnerable families with young children put in them and they really were foul- damp, noisy, that clammy cold that suggests long term problems. Quite threatening at night too.  I'd cut through the Tulse Hill estate at 2 am, I wouldn't cut through High Trees.  TBF some work has happened to try and make it a bit better, but there are still far too many dark corners with lurkers, and if you ask the police they have some hair raising stories.

e2a I am biased as the only two times I have been attacked in many years of living in Brixton and wandering round at all times of day and night, both have been in HIgh Trees!

eA2a just went to look for the crime map and it seems to have been split across three sub wards, so impossible to get a picture


----------



## T & P (Jun 20, 2014)

teuchter said:


> If a domed ceiling is too much for you then this one is a little more restrained.
> 
> View attachment 56183
> 
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/33550323



That's one for the Terrible Estate Agent Photographs thread....


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 20, 2014)

I have a friend who lives in High Trees. He's not said anything bad about it. Bad luck though, Manter


----------



## leanderman (Jun 20, 2014)

Orang Utan said:


> I have a friend who lives in High Trees. He's not said anything bad about it. Bad luck though, Manter



I have a friend on the next road (Arodene) who didn't report bring mugged for his watch because it would have hit his house price!


----------



## SarfLondoner (Jun 20, 2014)

leanderman said:


> I have a friend on the next road (Arodene) who didn't report bring mugged for his watch because it would have hit his house price!


----------



## editor (Jun 20, 2014)

leanderman said:


> I have a friend on the next road (Arodene) who didn't report bring mugged for his watch because it would have hit his house price!


What a twat.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 20, 2014)

Arodene Rd isn't exactly next door to the High Trees estate anyway


----------



## SarfLondoner (Jun 20, 2014)

leanderman said:


> I have a friend on the next road (Arodene) who didn't report bring mugged for his watch because it would have hit his house price!


If he bought his house recently he would have been robbed on that too.


----------



## Manter (Jun 20, 2014)

teuchter said:


> Arodene Rd isn't exactly next door to the High Trees estate anyway


next road to Leanderman's road. Clue's in the name


----------



## teuchter (Jun 20, 2014)

Yeah I get that, I thought he meant he didn't want to report a mugging in High Trees due to its proximity to Arodene Rd and his house.


----------



## CH1 (Jun 20, 2014)

teuchter said:


> If a domed ceiling is too much for you then this one is a little more restrained.View attachment 56183
> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/33550323


I'm beginning to despair at my own lack of taste.
Obviously the Dome/Loughborough Hotel Ballroom has the Full Monty, but I thought this High Trees flat was remarkably over the top (in a nice kind of way) - kind of camp/techno/Laura Ashley.

Given that normal practice on Loughborough Estate (my own local area) seems to be not to quote service charges and to state "cash buyers only" does anyone know what service charges are like in High Trees, and whether this property too would be "cash buyers only".


----------



## Belushi (Jun 20, 2014)

It's often difficult to get a mortgage on an ex-LA place and it wouldn't be the service charge that would worry me as much as the potential liability for any major works.


----------



## leanderman (Jun 20, 2014)

Belushi said:


> It's often difficult to get a mortgage on an ex-LA place and it wouldn't be the service charge that would worry me as much as the potential liability for any major works.



I suppose every type of property owner faces the risk of a big bill at some stage.


----------



## Manter (Jun 20, 2014)

leanderman said:


> I suppose every type of property owner faces the risk of a big bill at some stage.


Yeah, but ex la you can get £17k for changing someone else's windows, with no option to limp on into the next year in the hope you'll have more money.


----------



## leanderman (Jun 20, 2014)

Manter said:


> Yeah, but ex la you can get £17k for changing someone else's windows, with no option to limp on into the next year in the hope you'll have more money.



This is the same argument as the one over travel insurance!


----------



## Manter (Jun 20, 2014)

leanderman said:


> This is the same argument as the one over travel insurance!


no!  

if you're in a LA freehold flat, they can decide to (e.g., thinking of Tulse Hill) rebuild a bunch of lanscape-y things they let fall over and replace all the windows.  They take the cost they have got from their contractor, which will be extortionately high for a poor quality job, divide it by the number of flats, bump it up a bit for the private leaseholders and tell you you have 6 months to pay a big number.  Whereas if it was your flat you might just hang thinker curtains and wear a jumper until you could afford to do the windows…. 

no insurance involved!


----------



## leanderman (Jun 21, 2014)

Manter said:


> no!
> 
> if you're in a LA freehold flat, they can decide to (e.g., thinking of Tulse Hill) rebuild a bunch of lanscape-y things they let fall over and replace all the windows.  They take the cost they have got from their contractor, which will be extortionately high for a poor quality job, divide it by the number of flats, bump it up a bit for the private leaseholders and tell you you have 6 months to pay a big number.  Whereas if it was your flat you might just hang thinker curtains and wear a jumper until you could afford to do the windows….
> 
> no insurance involved!



Yes, this danger is worth bearing in mind.

My point was that it's catastrophic thinking ... like a medivac.


----------



## Manter (Jun 21, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Yes, this danger is worth bearing in mind.
> 
> My point was that it's catastrophic thinking ... like a medivac.


I know three people who have had huge bills- all in North London, as Lambeth are too busy wandering around wondering which properties they own


----------



## Smick (Jun 21, 2014)

I know someone who has had to sell up in Beckenham after a £17k bill for the replacement of a lift. She lives on the first floor and always takes the stairs. The only visible difference is new buttons to comply with disability legislation.

The housing association is, without doubt, a bunch of sharks and chancers. The lift company has a director who is also a director of the housing association.

We very nearly bought in Dorchester Court, before the above happened, but were warned off by, who I'm sure some will know, Sarah Savaskan from the NCT. She reckoned you'd want to pay £100k less than market value and hang on to that cash for repair bills as and when they arrive.


----------



## Manter (Jun 21, 2014)

And it's worth bearing in mind they don't have the same obligation to respond to section 21 requests, you can't nominate or have any say in capital expenditure (you can provide comments, apparently) and whereas in most buildings if the freeholder is taking the piss you can take over control of the building management, ex-LA you can't. 

I don't think clear eyed and informed examination of the risks involved on a course of action is the same as catastrophic thinking.


----------



## Rushy (Jun 21, 2014)

Does anyone know how much private owners in the saint  Matthews estate have had to fork out for the recent refurbishment works?


----------



## leanderman (Jun 21, 2014)

Manter said:


> I know three people who have had huge bills- all in North London, as Lambeth are too busy wandering around wondering which properties they own



The danger is, theoretically, priced in. It's a reason why you pay less. Risk and return etc.


----------



## gaijingirl (Jun 21, 2014)

leanderman said:


> The danger is, theoretically, priced in. It's a reason why you pay less. Risk and return etc.



yes this.. we almost bought on the St Matthews Estate (where we were living at the time).. the flats opposite Mango landin' on BWL and eventually bought on the Tulse Hill estate.  We specifically asked about any planned works at the time of buying and in fact, in the flats opp Mango landin' there were plans.  We didn't buy the flat in the end.  We couldn't afford anything but ex-LA and actually we were impressed with the ex-LA flats anyway.  We factored in the potential risk and we made sure we saved etc for that eventuality.  In the end we paid for a few things but nothing too major. It's also pretty obvious if you do your h/w.  We knew they were replacing all old windows with PVC on the estates and with the flats opp Mango Landin' they had the old windows.  We knew they were putting in secure doors on estates etc.   I think as long as you go in with your eyes open to the possibilities and plan accordingly it's mostly fine - although there is always a risk obviously.  There's always an element of risk though isn't there?

tbh.. even though we can choose our own builders having a not-ex LA place hasn't worked out any cheaper in terms up upkeep.  

It did used to annoy me when we got the maintenance bills and they were charging £50 for cleaning up a dead fox!


----------



## Belushi (Jun 21, 2014)

gaijingirl said:


> It did used to annoy me when we got the maintenance bills and they were charging £50 for cleaning up a dead fox!



TBF I wouldn't tackle a dead fox corpse for less than £50


----------



## gaijingirl (Jun 21, 2014)

Belushi said:


> TBF I wouldn't tackle a dead fox corpse for less than £50



I would have done it myself and pocketed the £50...


----------



## Rushy (Jun 21, 2014)

leanderman said:


> The danger is, theoretically, priced in. It's a reason why you pay less. Risk and return etc.


I don't think that's true. The price difference is because most people who can afford it would rather not live on an estate. Regular service charges are built in to price - whatever the origin of the stock. I don't think most people consider that the council is likely to be so much more expensive for "one off improvement programs" and quite literally "unchallengeable" as a freeholder.


----------



## leanderman (Jun 21, 2014)

gaijingirl said:


> yes this.. we almost bought on the St Matthews Estate (where we were living at the time).. the flats opposite Mango landin' on BWL and eventually bought on the Tulse Hill estate.  We specifically asked about any planned works at the time of buying and in fact, in the flats opp Mango landin' there were plans.  We didn't buy the flat in the end.  We couldn't afford anything but ex-LA and actually we were impressed with the ex-LA flats anyway.  We factored in the potential risk and we made sure we saved etc for that eventuality.  In the end we paid for a few things but nothing too major. It's also pretty obvious if you do your h/w.  We knew they were replacing all old windows with PVC on the estates and with the flats opp Mango Landin' they had the old windows.  We knew they were putting in secure doors on estates etc.   I think as long as you go in with your eyes open to the possibilities and plan accordingly it's mostly fine - although there is always a risk obviously.  There's always an element of risk though isn't there?
> 
> tbh.. even though we can choose our own builders having a not-ex LA place hasn't worked out any cheaper in terms up upkeep.
> 
> It did used to annoy me when we got the maintenance bills and they were charging £50 for cleaning up a dead fox!



Yep. Common sense, bit of research, good solicitor and surveyor and it'll work out.


----------



## gaijingirl (Jun 21, 2014)

Actually - I say we couldn't afford anything but ex-LA.. we could have afforded a v. small conversion flat in a Victorian building but we got much more space/rooms and a really good location with the ex-LA flat.  I bloody loved that flat.


----------



## SpamMisery (Jun 21, 2014)

gaijingirl said:


> I would have done it myself and pocketed the £50...



You didn't pay £50 each though right? £50 split between all the flats?


----------



## Rushy (Jun 21, 2014)

gaijingirl said:


> Actually - I say we couldn't afford anything but ex-LA.. we could have afforded a v. small conversion flat in a Victorian building but we got much more space/rooms and a really good location with the ex-LA flat.  I bloody loved that flat.


Yes - price per square foot is much less for ex LA because most people who can afford it would rather not live on a LA estate. The advantage is that, if an estate does not deter you and you value/need space over location, you can get a good deal.


----------



## gaijingirl (Jun 21, 2014)

SpamMisery said:


> You didn't pay £50 each though right? £50 split between all the flats?



well this is the thing.. it was £50 on our bill - so presumably on others' bills too..   so must have been loadsa money!


----------



## sparkybird (Jun 21, 2014)

A mate of mine who just sold his ex LA flat in Brixton told me that charges for works were capped at £10K for private owners.... have the rules changed maybe?


----------



## leanderman (Jun 21, 2014)

Rushy said:


> Yes - price per square foot is much less for ex LA because most people who can afford it would rather not live on a LA estate. The advantage is that, if an estate does not deter you and you value/need space over location, you can get a good deal.



That's the biggest reason - and people generally prefer freehold over leasehold

I stand by the idea that the uncertainty surrounding major repairs is priced in. 

It's a well-known risk and, if you weren't aware of it, your solicitor should point it out.


----------



## Rushy (Jun 21, 2014)

gaijingirl said:


> well this is the thing.. it was £50 on our bill - so presumably on others' bills too..   so must have been loadsa money!


I was charged 2500 about 15 years ago to scrape up some bird shit in a loft. I didn't really have any choice other than to delay a building project - it was contractual stuff. Totally ripped off on the grounds of it being a biological hazard requiring professional handling. A guy put a paper mask and suit on, scrapped it up into a bag and sprayed a disinfectant over the area. Sounds like no one wanted to scrape the fox up so called in a specialist out of "concern for everyone's safety."


----------



## Rushy (Jun 21, 2014)

leanderman said:


> That's the biggest reason - and people generally prefer freehold over leasehold
> 
> I stand by the idea that the uncertainty surrounding major repairs is priced in.
> 
> It's a well-known risk and, if you weren't aware of it, your solicitor should point it out.


_Should_, in your opinion. I think you are over estimating the quality / knowledge of conveyancers out there!


----------



## Manter (Jun 21, 2014)

I think I may have to say Rushy's right again. But I just can't bring myself to


----------



## Manter (Jun 21, 2014)

sparkybird said:


> A mate of mine who just sold his ex LA flat in Brixton told me that charges for works were capped at £10K for private owners.... have the rules changed maybe?


No, I nearly bought one that had £23k of works explicitly laid out in the documentation* 

I don't think there is any limit. And whatever they charge there is no come back as all the leaseholder protections exclude ex LA. 

* I didn't because they had already renovated the communal areas and it looked like a children's psychiatric unit. Hideous.


----------



## Rushy (Jun 21, 2014)

I recently sold an ex LA and the buyers were very quickly landed with a 10K + bill by the LA (30K+ / 3 flats).  I don't feel too sorry for them as they have put the flat back on the market 14 months later for 50% more so won't be out of pocket - but the bill was outrageous for the works proposed. Much of the work I had already done (to a higher standrard than any LA contractor would do) too.

That flat was exLA (2 flats now private, 1 still council), with LA still freeholder  but was a Victorian house conversion. There was no appreciable discount for it being LA freeholder and there was no issue raised during purchase.


----------



## nagapie (Jun 21, 2014)

Orang Utan said:


> I have a friend who lives in High Trees. He's not said anything bad about it. Bad luck though, Manter



Actually he's said a couple of things to me in the past that didn't sound so nice. But I think it's not that bad that he wouldn't live there or feels afraid for his daughter.


----------



## gaijingirl (Jun 21, 2014)

Rushy said:


> Yes - price per square foot is much less for ex LA because most people who can afford it would rather not live on a LA estate. The advantage is that, if an estate does not deter you and you value/need space over location, you can get a good deal.



yes... I think it's true that most people wouldn't.  We're not most people though.  Also we got an amazing location tbf..  

It worked out very well for us.


----------



## Manter (Jun 21, 2014)

gaijingirl said:


> yes... I think it's true that most people wouldn't.  We're not most people though.  Also we got an amazing location tbf..
> 
> It worked out very well for us.


My last flat was ex LA and not pretty, but in a great location. It was a small 50s block and I bought the freehold from the council, so financially it worked out well. However I hit every Lambeth fuck up known mankind.... And if I had been on an estate or the timelines had worked out differently I'd have lost the flat


----------



## leanderman (Jul 2, 2014)

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/jul/02/leap-london-house-prices-unequalled-nationwide


----------



## CH1 (Jul 2, 2014)

leanderman said:


> http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/jul/02/leap-london-house-prices-unequalled-nationwide


I think you should write them an op-ed on how Brixton prices have now peaked out. Look at the activity on this thread. Pre Christmas everyone was moaning about hectic viewings and the latest crazy prices.
Now it's like they're all on largactyl (which might be a good thing).


----------



## leanderman (Jul 2, 2014)

Yep. Those figures pre-date the recent 'correction'


----------



## Chilavert (Jul 2, 2014)

I accepted an offer on my flat a few weeks ago and the agent said the market has definitley slowed in the last few months.

To support that the flat next door to me is for sale and £25k has just been knocked off the asking price.


----------



## CH1 (Jul 2, 2014)

This one on Dalberg Road is up for auction on 17th July with a guide price of £750,000. "In the same family ownership for 40 years" according to the Standard.
http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/33663745


----------



## ddraig (Jul 2, 2014)

only 2 pics!! and a busted fence


----------



## CH1 (Jul 2, 2014)

ddraig said:


> only 2 pics!! and a busted fence


Could be an heir-hunters job. Why else do an auction?


----------



## sparkybird (Jul 2, 2014)

Apparently auctions are a popular way to sell now - you know you will sell it on the day and at well over the guide price. Buying at auction can be quite an expensive way to get a property nowadays


----------



## leanderman (Jul 2, 2014)

sparkybird said:


> Apparently auctions are a popular way to sell now - you know you will sell it on the day and at well over the guide price. Buying at auction can be quite an expensive way to get a property nowadays



yep - guide prices are deliberately low


----------



## Manter (Jul 2, 2014)

ddraig said:


> only 2 pics!! and a busted fence


Makes you think there must be a reason for no internal pics.....!


----------



## Chilavert (Jul 3, 2014)

In need of extensive renovation I assume?


----------



## CH1 (Jul 3, 2014)

Chilavert said:


> In need of extensive renovation I assume?


Talking of "In need of extensive renovation" this one seems to be about to hit the market. Current photo and further background soon.




http://www.urban75.org/blog/derelic...ane-is-this-brixtons-longest-abandoned-house/


----------



## ringo (Jul 3, 2014)

CH1 said:


> Talking of "In need of extensive renovation" this one seems to be about to hit the market. Current photo and further background soon.
> 
> http://www.urban75.org/blog/derelic...ane-is-this-brixtons-longest-abandoned-house/



Definitely had lights on about 7 or 8 years ago. Wasn't the house to the left also empty for years too? Seem to remember it in a state and for a while it looked like the two had been knocked through into one big place.


----------



## CH1 (Jul 3, 2014)

ringo said:


> Definitely had lights on about 7 or 8 years ago. Wasn't the house to the left also empty for years too? Seem to remember it in a state and for a while it looked like the two had been knocked through into one big place.


"The house to the left" - if you mean 318 that has been fully occupied for the last 25 years - as 4 flats. The basement had a flood some years ago so was empty temporarily.

320 (not in shot) was used as a car parts sales office (AH Terris) when I moved to Coldharbour Lane in 1986. Has gradually been converted back to residential (still converting the ground & basement now).


----------



## CH1 (Jul 3, 2014)

CH1 said:


> Talking of "In need of extensive renovation" this one seems to be about to hit the market. Current photo and further background soon.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


A fine set of estate agents boards on show here. On consideration I'm wondering if this is a move to confuse the council. Seems that the Empty Homes people are now leaning on them as well as Building Control.

I guess if it really is for sale - then that would be the best thing all round. Can't see what use it is keeping a house vacant and unfit for habitation. If the owners get some money, that's better than pretending to be looking after a disintegrating empty house.


----------



## equationgirl (Jul 3, 2014)

Chilavert said:


> In need of extensive renovation I assume?


Flamethrower I would have thought.


----------



## ringo (Jul 4, 2014)

CH1 said:


> "The house to the left" - if you mean 318 that has been fully occupied for the last 25 years - as 4 flats. The basement had a flood some years ago so was empty temporarily.
> 
> 320 (not in shot) was used as a car parts sales office (AH Terris) when I moved to Coldharbour Lane in 1986. Has gradually been converted back to residential (still converting the ground & basement now).



Fair do's, not sure how I imagined that then.


----------



## mxh (Jul 4, 2014)

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-45082306.html

£1,795,000 reduced to £1,495,000 in 2 months.

Crash no, just no viewings probably.


----------



## leanderman (Jul 4, 2014)

mxh said:


> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-45082306.html
> 
> £1,795,000 reduced to £1,495,000 in 2 months.
> 
> Crash no, just no viewings probably.



It was an insane asking price. People can get very silly - and greedy


----------



## Rushy (Jul 4, 2014)

A 4 bed on Mervan Rd sold (completed) at 1,610,000 in May.  They paid 140,000 for it in 96.


----------



## leanderman (Jul 4, 2014)

Rushy said:


> A 4 bed on Mervan Rd sold (completed) at 1,610,000 in May.  They paid 140,000 for it in 96.



Compare that with buying a £140,000 property in the North East in 1996.

There has to be a strong argument to tax these outsize, windfall gains, which the owners have hardly worked to reap.


----------



## Rushy (Jul 4, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Compare that with buying a £140,000 property in the North East in 1996.
> 
> There has to be a strong argument to tax these outsize, windfall gains, which the owners have hardly worked to reap.


They only reap it if they move to a cheaper area. Your proposal would just make it even more expensive to move home . eg. A couple living in a flat have a child and want to buy a larger home in the same area would find it even more difficult than it already is. 

Second or investment homes are already taxed at about 30 of the profit. Whilst that might seem fair on the face of it  I'm not sure it does the market a lot of good since it deters people from selling investment properties and decreases availability,  pushing up prices and reducing the number of taxable transactions.


----------



## CH1 (Jul 4, 2014)

Rushy said:


> A 4 bed on Mervan Rd sold (completed) at 1,610,000 in May.  They paid 140,000 for it in 96.


At the other end of the scale this came through from Mouseprice just now:
1 Carrara Close, London, SW9 8QL 4 bedroom house sold price £195,000

I presume this would be a case of right to buy being exercised under preserved rights?


----------



## leanderman (Jul 4, 2014)

Rushy said:


> They only reap it if they move to a cheaper area. Your proposal would just make it even more expensive to move home . eg. A couple living in a flat have a child and want to buy a larger home in the same area would find it even more difficult than it already is.
> 
> Second or investment homes are already taxed at about 30 of the profit. Whilst that might seem fair on the face of it  I'm not sure it does the market a lot of good since it deters people from selling investment properties and decreases availability,  pushing up prices and reducing the number of taxable transactions.



I'm thinking IHT, council tax, mansion tax.


----------



## CH1 (Jul 4, 2014)

leanderman said:


> I'm thinking IHT, council tax, mansion tax.


Doesn't inheritance tax cut in at £320,000 anyway - in which case nearly everyone's estate will be paying a fair wack.

Unless there is a rash of tax-planning solicitors that is.


----------



## Rushy (Jul 4, 2014)

leanderman said:


> I'm thinking IHT, council tax, mansion tax.


A mansion is still a mansion whether it cost 140,000 last decade or 1,610,000 this.

Any way it was only 4 beds and I'd wager it is no bigger than an extended home on your street. Just more convenient for the tube.

(and the vendor was I believe  moving locally,  rather than heavenward)


----------



## leanderman (Jul 4, 2014)

CH1 said:


> Doesn't inheritance tax cut in at £320,000 anyway - in which case nearly everyone's estate will be paying a fair wack.
> 
> Unless there is a rash of tax-planning solicitors that is.



Only the little people pay tax.


----------



## leanderman (Jul 4, 2014)

Rushy said:


> A mansion is still a mansion whether it cost 140,000 last decade or 1,610,000 this.
> 
> Any way it was only 4 beds and I'd wager it is no bigger than an extended home on your street. Just more convenient for the tube.
> 
> (and the vendor was I believe  moving locally,  rather than heavenward)



Funny! But property is too lightly taxed in this world - and the next.


----------



## mxh (Jul 5, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Funny! But property is too lightly taxed in this world - and the next.


Maybe a higher tax on speculators who buy, do nothing to the property and sell 6 months later for a profit.


----------



## SpamMisery (Jul 5, 2014)

mxh said:


> Maybe a higher tax on speculators who buy, do nothing to the property and sell 6 months later for a profit.



Nothing wrong with that; it's no different from trading commodities or shares


----------



## mxh (Jul 6, 2014)

SpamMisery said:


> Nothing wrong with that; it's no different from trading commodities or shares


Yes, that makes ok then.

Trading in Food and Energy just pushes the prices up creating food and energy poverty amongst the poorer.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 6, 2014)

SpamMisery said:


> Nothing wrong with that; it's no different from trading commodities or shares



Can you live in a portfolio of commodities or shares?


----------



## SpamMisery (Jul 6, 2014)

Living in them?


----------



## CH1 (Jul 9, 2014)

Apologies for delay - here is the carnage wrought by adverse weather conditions/mindless violence outside Kenyon Mansions 282 Coldharbour Lane Saturday night/Sunday morning.


----------



## leanderman (Jul 9, 2014)

CH1 said:


> Apologies for delay - here is the carnage wrought by adverse weather conditions/mindless violence outside Kenyon Mansions 282 Coldharbour Lane Saturday night/Sunday morning.
> View attachment 57213



Did you pick them up?!


----------



## CH1 (Jul 9, 2014)

One was on private property obviously, but as for the others I felt it better to leave them in case people wanted to recycle them.


----------



## leanderman (Jul 9, 2014)

CH1 said:


> One was on private property obviously, but as for the others I felt it better to leave them in case people wanted to recycle them.



Had a go at a litter bug in Josephine Ave yesterday. He said he had dropped his can of Red Bull behind a BT cable box because there was other rubbish there!


----------



## T & P (Jul 9, 2014)

CH1 said:


> Apologies for delay - here is the carnage wrought by adverse weather conditions/mindless violence outside Kenyon Mansions 282 Coldharbour Lane Saturday night/Sunday morning.
> View attachment 57213


Foxtons should be fined for littering, if you ask me.


----------



## Winot (Jul 9, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Had a go at a litter bug in Josephine Ave yesterday. He said he had dropped his can of Red Bull behind a BT cable box because there was other rubbish there!



Unassailable logic.


----------



## leanderman (Jul 10, 2014)

http://www.brixtonblog.com/tiny-brixton-studio-flat-on-sale-for-125000/23478


----------



## Belushi (Jul 10, 2014)

Hmmm, 13 sq metres and no windows.


----------



## shakespearegirl (Jul 10, 2014)

How is even possible, surely planning would insist on a window


----------



## Belushi (Jul 10, 2014)

Fire Safety for starters.  Saying that a friend was shown a basement flat with no windows when he was looking to rent in the East End a few years ago.


----------



## SarfLondoner (Jul 10, 2014)

leanderman said:


> http://www.brixtonblog.com/tiny-brixton-studio-flat-on-sale-for-125000/23478


That looks like the back alley behind the shops on Morrish road.


----------



## teuchter (Jul 10, 2014)

I don't think a window is really necessary for fire safety when it's just a single room with a door leading straight outside. More of an issue would be providing ventilation.


----------



## Belushi (Jul 10, 2014)

Call me fussy but I like a bit of light as well. Are there no standards saying homes have to have a window?


----------



## leanderman (Jul 10, 2014)

Belushi said:


> Call me fussy but I like a bit of light as well. Are there no standards saying homes have to have a window?



Reminds me of the slummy Caledonian Road landlord in the BBC's Secret History of our Streets who realised he could house foreign workers in the storage cellar space underneath his parades of shops.


----------



## teuchter (Jul 10, 2014)

Belushi said:


> Call me fussy but I like a bit of light as well. Are there no standards saying homes have to have a window?


http://www.withoutspaceandlight.com/#!without-light

There are limited standards for newbuilds. Nothing explicitly in England&Wales building regs though, as far as I know.

As for existing buildings... if it's a change of use (eg from garage to dwelling) I think that maybe planning can refuse this on the grounds that the dwelling would not have adequate daylight ... some kind of planning geek could answer this better than I.

Rushy


----------



## Belushi (Jul 11, 2014)

It's made the Guardian now http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/jul/10/125-thousand-pounds-brixton-flat


----------



## Rushy (Jul 11, 2014)

teuchter said:


> http://www.withoutspaceandlight.com/#!without-light
> 
> There are limited standards for newbuilds. Nothing explicitly in England&Wales building regs though, as far as I know.
> 
> ...


Daylight is a consideration for planning. Not for PD I don't think.  Building regs stipulate min openable window sizes.  It as it already has a boiler which has worn out so I imagine this place has simply been used as a self contained dwelling for a while and is therefore beyond enforcement. Or vendor is being naive and does not realise the place is illegal.

My problem is usually having to justify  too much glazing rather than too little (max 25pc of OA floor space).


----------



## billythefish (Jul 11, 2014)

The minimum standard for a studio flat is currently 37 M2 according to the London Plan. It would have had to have been a residential dwelling for a good few years to be a legitimate and legally used property.
As for daylight and ventilation, it is more a Building Control matter than planning. I wouldn't be surprised to see the council step in on this one and force it off the market...


----------



## Rushy (Jul 11, 2014)

billythefish said:


> The minimum standard for a studio flat is currently 37 M2 according to the London Plan. It would have had to have been a residential dwelling for a good few years to be a legitimate and legally used property.
> As for daylight and ventilation, it is more a Building Control matter than planning. I wouldn't be surprised to see the council step in on this one and force it off the market...


Am I right that in Lambeth studios are still not valid proposals for conversions - only new build.

Have definitely known luck of adequate daylight used as planning objection for flat  conversions where a flat,  or a significant portion of a flat, is in the basement with limited fenestration.

Eta. Would only need to prove four years as a self contained unit to be unenforceable.


----------



## artyfarty (Jul 11, 2014)

KFH should be ashamed and it looks like they are, since it's been in the Graun the ads not on their site anymore. It's a pretty grotty alley that it's down, litter, puddles, potholes and rubbish dumped. How someone could get planning permission for that beggars belief.


----------



## Rushy (Jul 11, 2014)

artyfarty said:


> KFH should be ashamed and it looks like they are, since it's been in the Graun the ads not on their site anymore. It's a pretty grotty alley that it's down, litter, puddles, potholes and rubbish dumped. How someone could get planning permission for that beggars belief.


They couldn't. But if they build it and use it as a self contained unit for four years without objection (and can prove it)  planning loses the power to enforce against it.


----------



## artyfarty (Jul 11, 2014)

So you can convert a garage, live in it really quietly and if no one complains you've got permission? Or at least planning cant stop it?


----------



## thatguyhex (Jul 11, 2014)

How about this for a conversion?

 

That's the alley that runs down the side of the Academy - this was the rear end of one of the shops facing onto Brixton Road. The downstairs room appears to be an open plan living room/kitchen, so presumably bedroom and bathroom in the new part upstairs. So, if you fancy living somewhere that the windows receive direct sunlight for, ooh, I dunno, half an hour a day, and is about 20 feet away from one of south London's largest music venues and right next to where the queue is, this is the place for you!

Man, and I thought having the Dogstar and its queue opposite me was noisy sometimes.


----------



## CH1 (Jul 11, 2014)

thatguyhex said:


> How about this for a conversion?
> View attachment 57377
> That's the alley that runs down the side of the Academy - this was the rear end of one of the shops facing onto Brixton Road. The downstairs room appears to be an open plan living room/kitchen, so presumably bedroom and bathroom in the new part upstairs. So, if you fancy living somewhere that the windows receive direct sunlight for, ooh, I dunno, half an hour a day, and is about 20 feet away from one of south London's largest music venues and right next to where the queue is, this is the place for you!
> 
> Man, and I thought having the Dogstar and its queue opposite me was noisy sometimes.


I prefer it to the Morrish Road one by miles. What's the damage?


----------



## thatguyhex (Jul 11, 2014)

It didn't have a price on the sign, maybe I'll pop into La Foxtons and ask next time I'm passing... shall we start a pool? I reckon £300k.


----------



## CH1 (Jul 11, 2014)

thatguyhex said:


> It didn't have a price on the sign, maybe I'll pop into La Foxtons and ask next time I'm passing... shall we start a pool? I reckon £300k.


As far as I can see on Foxtons website there is a development of a 1 bed flat, 1 bed house and 2 bed "duplex" in Astoria Walk. Prices are £450,000, £479,950 and £599,950 respectively.
Looks like you were under-ambitious!


----------



## thatguyhex (Jul 11, 2014)

You just beat me to it. It's the "one bedroom house", at £479,950. F u u u c k . 

Notice that entry is via the first floor. What do you do if you're downstairs and there's a fire? Jump out of the window, I guess.

It looked pretty charming before the conversion, too!


----------



## Crispy (Jul 12, 2014)

Fucking half a fucking million fucking pounds.

PS: Here's the listing: http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?location_ids=32&property_id=888952


----------



## Dan U (Jul 12, 2014)

Crispy said:


> Fucking half a fucking million fucking pounds.



To live next to a queue. Whoever buys or rents that is a twit. 

How long before they complain to Lambeth about the noisy queue etc.


----------



## thatguyhex (Jul 12, 2014)

Crispy said:


> Fucking half a fucking million fucking pounds.
> 
> PS: Here's the listing: http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?location_ids=32&property_id=888952



Downstairs: 31.84 square metres
Upstairs: 28.95 square metres

So £479,950 / (31.84  + 28.95) gives us a price of... a mere £7,895 per square metre. What a bargain.


----------



## CH1 (Jul 12, 2014)

thatguyhex said:


> Downstairs: 31.84 square metres
> Upstairs: 28.95 square metres
> 
> So £479,950 / (31.84  + 28.95) gives us a price of... a mere £7,895 per square metre. What a bargain.


You think that's a bargain try this:
http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?loc...=map&search_type=SS&sold=1&submit_type=search
NB: you're obviously good at maths - what is the price per sq metre here (assuming that the floors actually exist!)
PHOTOSHOP ALERT: Foxtons have blanked out rival agents' signs


----------



## thatguyhex (Jul 12, 2014)

Oh my God, the recluse's house. (Sorry, that's how I've always thought of it every time I pass it.) Maybe he passed away. "Opportunity for refurbishment/conversion"... it must be in a right state inside.

They don't provide an accurate figure for floor space there so we can't calculate it yet. But that said, £1,150,000 for six bedrooms means £191,667 a bedroom, or perhaps three two-bedroom flats at £383,333... and this is the pre-refurb price.


----------



## CH1 (Jul 12, 2014)

thatguyhex said:


> Oh my God, the recluse's house. (Sorry, that's how I've always thought of it every time I pass it.) Maybe he passed away. "Opportunity for refurbishment/conversion"... it must be in a right state inside.
> 
> They don't provide an accurate figure for floor space there so we can't calculate it yet. But that said, £1,150,000 for six bedrooms means £191,667 a bedroom, or perhaps three two-bedroom flats at £383,333... and this is the pre-refurb price.


The person "minding" the property is hale and hearty - I saw him chatting to 2 Mormon missionaries only 2 days ago.

He is apparently not the owner - it is some sort of family thing, and Lambeth have been pressing them to bring it into use - otherwise compulsory purchase.
Hence it being on the market.


----------



## thatguyhex (Jul 12, 2014)

Thanks for clearing up that minor mystery!


----------



## equationgirl (Jul 12, 2014)

That Astoria Walk conversion is such a massive pisstake it's untrue. Half a million for a bizarre house.


----------



## friendofdorothy (Jul 13, 2014)

Can it really be called a house when its obviously behind/ over a shop?
Not most people idea of a half million pound house.


----------



## CH1 (Jul 13, 2014)

friendofdorothy said:


> Can it really be called a house when its obviously behind/ over a shop?
> Not most people idea of a half million pound house.


It should be called an annexe I feel. Until recently Lambeth Planning would not have permitted anything like this. I could dig out refusals on such back-garage type development from the Brixton Society archives only a couple of years ago.

Recently Lambeth Planning seem to have become so much more relaxed.
I think this is due to several reasons:
1. some developers are keen to appeal refusals - and the council can be ordered to pay costs if they lose.
2. the council get paid a grant for every EXTRA unit of housing they allow to be created - even disgracefully small flats and off-beat developments like this.
3. the developers themselves are piling in whist the market is so high, getting away with whatever they can sell.


----------



## technical (Jul 14, 2014)

And there are less people (and resources) in the planning and enforcement departments dealing with a much greater workload


----------



## trabuquera (Jul 14, 2014)

equationgirl said:


> That Astoria Walk conversion is such a massive pisstake it's untrue. Half a million for a bizarre house.



The details actually begin: "Enviably  located [sic] in the heart of vibrant Brixton...."

George Orwell is alive and well and working for Foxtons.


----------



## Manter (Jul 15, 2014)

There was a similarly bizarre conversion in Stockwell. It is on the market about 50% of the time but I can't currently find a listing for it. On stockwell lane IIRC.... Basically a garage that had been dug out so it was a sort of upside down house, with one door and a window by some bins behind furnival press. We looked at it for shits and giggles but were actually left speechless that it was being sold as a house.


----------



## CH1 (Jul 23, 2014)

This looks a better bet. Posh side of Coldharbour Lane (and in Loughborough Park conservation area). Top floor of an 1844 villa - but no rights to garden mentioned, although might have off street parking (unless ruled out by the lease). £599,950.
Almost opposite the £1,150,000 wreck incidentally.
 http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?cen...word&search_type=SS&sold=1&submit_type=search


----------



## Cowley (Jul 24, 2014)

CH1 said:


> This looks a better bet. Posh side of Coldharbour Lane (and in Loughborough Park conservation area). Top floor of an 1844 villa - but no rights to garden mentioned, although might have off street parking (unless ruled out by the lease). £599,950.
> Almost opposite the £1,150,000 wreck incidentally.
> View attachment 58208 http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?center_point_name=SW9 8RP&keyword_type=postcode&lat=51.463359&lon=-0.105828&property_id=905964&radius=0.5&search_form=keyword&search_type=SS&sold=1&submit_type=search


 
You could have bought the whole thing for that price a few years ago.


----------



## MAD-T-REX (Aug 21, 2014)

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-46871495.html

£200,000 for a medium sized room (sorry, studio) on the Norwood Road. The floorplan is just ridiculous.


----------



## uk benzo (Aug 21, 2014)

MAD-T-REX said:


> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-46871495.html
> 
> £200,000 for a medium sized room (sorry, studio) on the Norwood Road. The floorplan is just ridiculous.



£1142/square foot. Bargain.


----------



## Manter (Aug 21, 2014)

MAD-T-REX said:


> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-46871495.html
> 
> £200,000 for a medium sized room (sorry, studio) on the Norwood Road. The floorplan is just ridiculous.


Christ, that is just a room, isn't it?


----------



## buscador (Aug 21, 2014)

MAD-T-REX said:


> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-46871495.html
> 
> £200,000 for a medium sized room (sorry, studio) on the Norwood Road. The floorplan is just ridiculous.



Good job it's so small because you could never have anyone round for dinner in case they needed to go to the loo.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 21, 2014)

MAD-T-REX said:


> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-46871495.html
> 
> £200,000 for a medium sized room (sorry, studio) on the Norwood Road. The floorplan is just ridiculous.





> set within a grand conversion


----------



## boohoo (Aug 21, 2014)

MAD-T-REX said:


> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-46871495.html
> 
> £200,000 for a medium sized room (sorry, studio) on the Norwood Road. The floorplan is just ridiculous.



Huge piss take.  It's smaller than my living room.


----------



## editor (Aug 21, 2014)

boohoo said:


> Huge piss take.  It's smaller than my living room.


Mind you, it does come with a sofa that moves around on its own.


----------



## boohoo (Aug 21, 2014)

editor said:


> Mind you, it does come with a sofa that moves around on its own.
> 
> View attachment 59893



And someone has carefully hung up a garment bag on the shower rail to show how the bathroom could double as a wardrobe


----------



## uk benzo (Aug 21, 2014)

editor said:


> Mind you, it does come with a sofa that moves around on its own.
> 
> View attachment 59893



I'd go nuts if I had to eat, sleep and shit in the same room full-time.


----------



## ddraig (Aug 21, 2014)

I did and mine had a tiny but separate bathroom and kitchen


----------



## Winot (Aug 21, 2014)

uk benzo said:


> I'd go nuts if I had to eat, sleep and shit in the same room full-time.


----------



## Orang Utan (Aug 21, 2014)

I'd gladly live there for £150 a week.


----------



## MrSki (Aug 21, 2014)

editor said:


> Mind you, it does come with a sofa that moves around on its own.
> 
> View attachment 59893


Imagine being on the shitter if there was four people sitting on the sofa!


----------



## T & P (Aug 21, 2014)

MrSki said:


> Imagine being on the shitter if there was four people sitting on the sofa!


----------



## Orang Utan (Aug 21, 2014)

At least you wouldn't have to pause your after dinner chat about house prices while you went for a dump.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 21, 2014)

at that range you'd get shit particles in your food prep area


----------



## Orang Utan (Aug 21, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> at that range you'd get shit particles in your food prep area


Not if you flush properly.


----------



## Smick (Aug 21, 2014)

DotCommunist said:


> at that range you'd get shit particles in your food prep area


Is there not some law about two doors between toilets and kitchens and dining areas?

You sometimes see pubs and restaurants which have two doors on the way to the bathroom. My father in law built his own house and apparently the planning people were very definite about that.


----------



## Orang Utan (Aug 21, 2014)

There are two doors! One on the left and one on the right!


----------



## Mr Retro (Aug 21, 2014)

editor said:


> Mind you, it does come with a sofa that moves around on its own.




And shirts that hang themselves up in the bog. And people doubt Foxtons. Those guys are years ahead of the game.


----------



## Orang Utan (Aug 21, 2014)

Mr Retro said:


> And shirts that hang themselves up in the bog. And people doubt Foxtons. Those guys are years ahead of the game.


I don't get either yours or editor 's comments


----------



## peterkro (Aug 21, 2014)

Smick said:


> Is there not some law about two doors between toilets and kitchens and dining areas?
> 
> You sometimes see pubs and restaurants which have two doors on the way to the bathroom. My father in law built his own house and apparently the planning people were very definite about that.


It certainly used to be in the building regs "vented lobby between a toilet and kitchen" I'm afraid like many other sensible regs it's gone by the board.


----------



## SpamMisery (Aug 21, 2014)

A loo off a kitchen puts me right off, but that loo doesn't directly exit onto the kitchen, perhaps that's the reason it avoided building regs? Or it's a conversion that existed long enough to have the regs expire - can't remember what the timescales are though


----------



## Orang Utan (Aug 21, 2014)

peterkro said:


> It certainly used to be in the building regs "vented lobby between a toilet and kitchen" I'm afraid like many other sensible regs it's gone by the board.


I guess the vented lobby is the studio itself.


----------



## Manter (Aug 22, 2014)

Orang Utan said:


> I don't get either yours or editor 's comments


Can you not see the two photos in editor's post?


----------



## Orang Utan (Aug 22, 2014)

Manter said:


> Can you not see the two photos in editor's post?


Yes of course.


----------



## Manter (Aug 22, 2014)

Orang Utan said:


> Yes of course.


So you must understand the comments. Look at the sofa in the two pictures


----------



## Orang Utan (Aug 22, 2014)

Yeah, I see that. Just don't get the comments.


----------



## Mr Retro (Aug 22, 2014)

Orang Utan said:


> I don't get either yours or editor 's comments


Do an old school spot the difference between the eds 2 photos


----------



## Orang Utan (Aug 22, 2014)

Mr Retro said:


> Do an old school spot the difference between the eds 2 photos


I know. But the photographer is just.moving stuff about to take his photos, surely?


----------



## teuchter (Aug 22, 2014)

...and OU calls *me* "Mr logic"


----------



## bmd (Aug 22, 2014)

Orang Utan said:


> I know. But the photographer is just.moving stuff about to take his photos, surely?


 
Best post on urban ever.


----------



## ddraig (Aug 22, 2014)

not Brixton but 
you'd need to be under 2 ft 4 inches to get into this flat or enter on all fours!!
http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/aug/22/london-landlord-fined-renting-small-flat


----------



## Manter (Aug 22, 2014)

ddraig said:


> not Brixton but
> you'd need to be under 2 ft 4 inches to get into this flat or enter on all fours!!
> http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/aug/22/london-landlord-fined-renting-small-flat


It was rented by a *couple*

Christ, horrendous....


----------



## bmd (Aug 22, 2014)

ddraig said:


> not Brixton but
> you'd need to be under 2 ft 4 inches to get into this flat or enter on all fours!!
> http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/aug/22/london-landlord-fined-renting-small-flat


 
Wtf! Why would you build it like that? Why not just prop a ladder against the upstairs floor? It's not like you'll be able to carry anything up those stairs.


----------



## el-ahrairah (Aug 29, 2014)

surprised we haven't had this yet http://www.standard.co.uk/news/lond...-foxtons-estate-agents-at-1030pm-9698665.html


----------



## Gramsci (Aug 30, 2014)

el-ahrairah said:


> surprised we haven't had this yet http://www.standard.co.uk/news/lond...-foxtons-estate-agents-at-1030pm-9698665.html



The one in West Hampstead was opposed by locals



> I sincerely hope the council will take heed of the strength of local objections to this application and refuse it; and that the site remains a retail unit providing goods and services that local residents can afford to buy other than houses.


----------



## Gramsci (Aug 30, 2014)

el-ahrairah said:


> surprised we haven't had this yet http://www.standard.co.uk/news/lond...-foxtons-estate-agents-at-1030pm-9698665.html



This kind of thing is not uncommon. Its more likely the mother cannot afford childcare.


----------



## el-ahrairah (Aug 30, 2014)

Gramsci said:


> This kind of thing is not uncommon. Its more likely the mother cannot afford childcare.



probably the case, but its nice to have photos of Foxtons using child labour, i reckon.


----------



## CH1 (Sep 11, 2014)

Latest Foxton's very high priced central Brixton property.




I'm tempted to tag along for a viewing - I've always wondered what it was like inside the old St John's School.




Of course the purchaser will have a last few weeks to savour their local pub before it is demolished to make way for a midi sized residential tower.
http://www.foxtons.co.uk/property-for-sale-in-brixton/kncl0137027

Purchase price for this three/five bedroom "duplex" is £1,850,000 as per the Evening Standard yesterday. (Must be only one of several flats, since it is "share of freehold")
(pictures from Urban http://www.urban75.org/brixton/history/canterbury.html)


----------



## editor (Sep 11, 2014)

Nooo. That really depresses me. I'd always assumed that those buildings would be safe from the property locusts.


----------



## boohoo (Sep 11, 2014)

CH1 said:


> Latest Foxton's very high priced central Brixton property.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It's nice - I like the light and the studio space - lot of money though.

For that money I'd buy this which is near me, out in the suburbs 

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-39462533.html


----------



## technical (Sep 11, 2014)

existentialist said:


> It's just an awful long way down if it becomes difficult...!





boohoo said:


> It's nice - I like the light and the studio space - lot of money though.
> 
> For that money I'd buy this which is near me, out in the suburbs
> 
> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-39462533.html



Removed from sale - you didn't buy it did you?


----------



## boohoo (Sep 11, 2014)

technical said:


> Removed from sale - you didn't buy it did you?



No - it looks like it sold the end of last year. It's one of a few house left from a little hamlet near Crown Point. Some lovely properties and I think last year were still quite cheap.


----------



## Rushy (Sep 11, 2014)

editor said:


> Nooo. That really depresses me. I'd always assumed that those buildings would be safe from the property locusts.


They were converted more than 10yrs ago.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Sep 11, 2014)

ddraig said:


> not Brixton but
> you'd need to be under 2 ft 4 inches to get into this flat or enter on all fours!!
> http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/aug/22/london-landlord-fined-renting-small-flat


Wow - three grand fine, after two years of renting it out. He's really learnt his lesson now.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 11, 2014)

I am sure I read somewhere in the legal journals that a landlord was fined £40,000 for not arranging a gas safety inspection test. I will try and find link.

Link here.


----------



## CH1 (Sep 12, 2014)

boohoo said:


> It's nice - I like the light and the studio space - lot of money though. For that money I'd buy this which is near me, out in the suburbs
> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-39462533.html


So have you been in (St Johns buildings that is)?

When this building was converted it was originally marketed as artist studios with accommodation. Interesting to know how much they cost then. Maybe one of our more property literate members can recall?

I see what you mean about that Streatham/Norwood property.


----------



## CH1 (Sep 12, 2014)

editor said:


> Nooo. That really depresses me. I'd always assumed that those buildings would be safe from the property locusts.





Rushy said:


> They were converted more than 10yrs ago.


The original conversion was done post this 1992 planning permission:
http://planning-docs.lambeth.gov.uk/AnitePublicDocs/00064723.pdf

Note that the applicant had a kind of community feel:
William Wilding
St Johns Renovation Project
20 Linom Road
SW4 7PD

It is present market conditions which are causing inflationary pricing.

Prior to conversion into mixed use studio thingees this building was used by the Metropolitan Police for training purposes. It is many years since it was used as St John's School, but the back history is here (from British History Online):

*St. John's C.E. Primary School, Canterbury Crescent*
The site of this school was freely given by Benedict John Angell Angell. The buildings
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



were designed in Tudor style by Benjamin Ferrey and built in Rochester brick with Bath stone dressings by Messrs. Holland in 1853; the cost was £1,600. As originally planned the school contained three large rooms and provided accommodation for 180 boys, 120 girls and 100 infants. There was also a house for the master. (_The Builder_, 1853, p. 360.) Later additions have been unsympathetic. The school was severely damaged in the war of 1939–45, and was reopened in 1947.


----------



## leanderman (Oct 1, 2014)

Neighbour went to look at place on Helix Gardens yesterday that was on at £1.6m, then reduced to £1.3m, and was told £1m might secure it. 
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-48295736.html


----------



## happyshopper (Oct 1, 2014)

leanderman said:


> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-48295736.html



I'm not sure how Foxton's get to 5 bedrooms, unless they expect someone to sleep in the cellar.


----------



## Rushy (Oct 1, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Neighbour went to look at place on Helix Gardens yesterday that was on at £1.6m, then reduced to £1.3m, and was told £1m might secure it.
> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-48295736.html


£1million would seem like a "bargain" compared to three houses sold for 1.4 to 1.6 million each in Mervan Road in the past 3 months. So I've been told by the agent - I've not seen Land Reg confirmation yet.


----------



## leanderman (Oct 1, 2014)

happyshopper said:


> I'm not sure how Foxton's get to 5 bedrooms, unless they expect someone to sleep in the cellar.



This has puzzled me too. No sign of converted loft and sitting room is not split.


----------



## leanderman (Oct 1, 2014)

Rushy said:


> £1million would seem like a "bargain" compared to three houses sold for 1.4 to 1.6 million each in Mervan Road in the past 3 months. So I've been told by the agent - I've not seen Land Reg confirmation yet.



Yes. I was wondering about that too. A similar alleged sale took place in Sudbourne rd. 

I suppose the buyers may not worry too much if they sold at the same time (at these bonkers prices).


----------



## ska invita (Oct 4, 2014)

Om Unit & Danny Scrilla - Gentrification - opens with a prank call to foxtons in brixton " featuring the unwitting Giles"


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 4, 2014)

happyshopper said:


> I'm not sure how Foxton's get to 5 bedrooms, unless they expect someone to sleep in the cellar.



Isn't that where the staff sleep?


----------



## CH1 (Oct 8, 2014)

Bargain of the week (from the Standard)
3 bed house Trinity Gardens £999,950
 
http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?loc...ch_form=map&search_type=SS&submit_type=search

What I don't understand is why this charming terraced house in a bijou conservation area square is half the price of the St Johns duplex on the edge of a major building site further up the thread.

Any views on this leanderman, Rushy?


----------



## leanderman (Oct 8, 2014)

£1,000sq ft. Bonkers. And I thought prices were falling.


----------



## editor (Oct 8, 2014)

leanderman said:


> £1,000sq ft. Bonkers. And I thought prices were falling.


I've been in a couple of those houses. They are tiny.


----------



## leanderman (Oct 8, 2014)

400ft garden!

http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?sea...oh_date_from=&oh_date_to=&keyword_value=Sw2+2


----------



## brixtonblade (Oct 8, 2014)

Never mind £ per foot, I'd do myself a mischief living that close to the pub


----------



## editor (Oct 8, 2014)

It's all too depressing.


----------



## SarfLondoner (Oct 8, 2014)

Foxtons are advertising houses on Brixton hill but still manage to mention Clapham north as being local.


----------



## SarfLondoner (Oct 8, 2014)

leanderman said:


> Neighbour went to look at place on Helix Gardens yesterday that was on at £1.6m, then reduced to £1.3m, and was told £1m might secure it.
> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-48295736.html


That's a huge climbdown from the original quote,Is it the owner or the agents that creates the asking price?


----------



## Rushy (Oct 8, 2014)

CH1 said:


> Bargain of the week (from the Standard)
> 3 bed house Trinity Gardens £999,950
> View attachment 62179
> http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?loc...ch_form=map&search_type=SS&submit_type=search
> ...


The St Johns place is 2 and a half times larger and at least as characterful or unique, I reckon.

This one is closer to where you live.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 9, 2014)

I actually saw an advert for affordable housing in the Evening Standard today. Studios and 1 beds from £180,000. First year's ground rent paid, 75% mortgage, only £2k needed for deposit. No idea about the quality, mind. 
But it's in fucking Hounslow. 
No.


----------



## CH1 (Oct 9, 2014)

Orang Utan said:


> I actually saw an advert for affordable housing in the Evening Standard today. Studios and 1 beds from £180,000. First year's ground rent paid, 75% mortgage, only £2k needed for deposit. No idea about the quality, mind.
> But it's in fucking Hounslow.
> No.


How can £180,000 be considered "affordable"?


----------



## leanderman (Oct 9, 2014)

SarfLondoner said:


> That's a huge climbdown from the original quote,Is it the owner or the agents that creates the asking price?



I'll find out.


----------



## ska invita (Oct 9, 2014)

SarfLondoner said:


> That's a huge climbdown from the original quote,Is it the owner or the agents that creates the asking price?


its agents surely - they come round and do a valuation, based on the highest whatever they think they can get


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 9, 2014)

CH1 said:


> How can £180,000 be considered "affordable"?


It is for a single person on 20-30k pa. Which is a vast improvement on other affordable homes I've read about. But not for anyone on less of course


----------



## CH1 (Oct 9, 2014)

SarfLondoner said:


> That's a huge climbdown from the original quote,Is it the owner or the agents that creates the asking price?





ska invita said:


> its agents surely - they come round and do a valuation, based on the highest whatever they think they can get


I think Foxtons (and probably most others in Brixton where prices are/have been volatile) inevitably act on a trial and error basis. The evaluation is indeed of what the market will bear (remember the estate agent is trying to get the best possible deal for the seller).

I think the market is currently softening quite a lot (no doubt leanderman may disagree)

This flat here - almost opposite me started listed at £599,000 (see post #1787 23rd July 14), then dropped to £499,000, and is now under offer at £450,000.

I reckon that is a soft market - way off what was happening a year ago. Anybody buying out there should be bargaining strongly, and anybody selling should make sure they have a genuinely realistic valuation to defend.


----------



## CH1 (Oct 9, 2014)

Orang Utan said:


> It is for a single person on 20-30k pa. Which is a vast improvement on other affordable homes I've read about. But not for anyone on less of course


Is that for 25% of £180,000 then? How do the mortgage/rental costs work out then?


----------



## ska invita (Oct 9, 2014)

CH1 said:


> I think Foxtons (and probably most others in Brixton where prices are/have been volatile) inevitably act on a trial and error basis. The evaluation is indeed of what the market will bear (remember the estate agent is trying to get the best possible deal for the seller).


yes, i think the way it works is "we managed to get someone to buy a similar sized property for xxx so lets try and put this on for xxx - no, in fact lets put it on for xxx + 5% and so on until enough people finally stop paying.

theres definitely a big wobble going on on house prices since a highpoint in spring but it seems to me predicting house price movements is as possible as picking winning horses - there are trends and several factors to consider, and some might guess right, but anything can happen season to season.


----------



## leanderman (Oct 9, 2014)

Neighbour says they claim to have had an offer of £1.25m. And four bedrooms, not five.


----------



## snowy_again (Oct 9, 2014)

CH1 said:


> remember the estate agent is trying to get the best possible deal for their own commission.


 more like - Foxton's are famous for overselling expectations to sellers


----------



## CH1 (Oct 9, 2014)

snowy_again said:


> more like - Foxton's are famous for overselling expectations to sellers


If you are quoting me you should avoid putting words into my mouth (even if they are true). Your own comment may also be true - who am I to say?


----------



## Manter (Oct 9, 2014)

SarfLondoner said:


> That's a huge climbdown from the original quote,Is it the owner or the agents that creates the asking price?


Mixture. You get (usually) at least three agents to quote. You-the owner- decide what you want to put it in for bearing in kind how fast a sale you want, how much you think you can get etc. It is ultimately the owner's decision, the Agents only advise you. Different agents have (allegedly- they'd deny it) different approaches eg fictions are notorious for putting stuff on very high then reducing it, then you usually accept a bit below the asking price. KFH tend to price low to fair and you end up paying more than the asking price if it's popular/you end up in a bidding war etc. houses that take a big cut in asking price is often because the price is massively unrealistic- the owners asked for what they want/need for the next step they aspire to rather than what the market can bear- or because someone tried to buy it and something turned out to be wrong when surveys/legal searches came back.

E2a my autocorrect changed Foxtons to fictions which is so good I'm going to leave it.


----------



## snowy_again (Oct 9, 2014)

CH1 said:


> If you are quoting me you should avoid putting words into my mouth (even if they are true). Your own comment may also be true - who am I to say?



Yes, apologies.


----------



## SarfLondoner (Oct 9, 2014)

Thanks Manter


----------



## Rushy (Oct 9, 2014)

Manter said:


> E2a my autocorrect changed Foxtons to fictions which is so good I'm going to leave it.


I thought you'd done that on purpose. Brilliant!


----------



## ska invita (Oct 17, 2014)

> There are more than ample eateries and bars at your fingertips, plus a vibrant music scene (both areas are Basement Jaxx's old stomping ground). Many funky clothes shops plus a great Saturday market are all found in Brixton. Take the Sunday papers to beautiful Ruskin Park, just 2 minutes southwest of you.


----------



## shakespearegirl (Oct 20, 2014)

http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/property/london/archbishops-place/

Houses in this street have literally doubled in price in the last 4 years.


----------



## clandestino (Oct 20, 2014)

shakespearegirl said:


> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/property/london/archbishops-place/
> 
> Houses in this street have literally doubled in price in the last 4 years.



That's incredible. I used to live on that street and it is lovely, but those houses are tiny, even the 3 bed ones.


----------



## leanderman (Oct 20, 2014)

clandestino said:


> That's incredible. I used to live on that street and it is lovely, but those houses are tiny, even the 3 bed ones.



1,100sq ft?

If so, at £750 per sq ft it's better 'value' than stuff up thread, some of which was around £1,000 sq ft.

It's all madness of course.


----------



## clandestino (Oct 20, 2014)

leanderman said:


> 1,100sq ft?
> 
> If so, at £750 per sq ft it's better 'value' than stuff up thread, some of which was around £1,000 sq ft.
> 
> It's all madness of course.



I can't see where on that page it mentions the floorspace. I'm pretty sure they're not that big...


----------



## clandestino (Oct 20, 2014)

No, found a similar one and you're right. I can still vouch that those houses are tiny...

http://www.kfh.co.uk/residential-pr...ton-sw2-archbishops-place/2112968/#floor-plan


----------



## shakespearegirl (Oct 20, 2014)

The Haart listed one is on the wrong side of the street, they are much smaller on that side, have large south facing front gardens and teeny quite dark back gardens. 

It is a really lovely street to live on, but the houses are really small and lots of them haven't been converted properly, so lofts and/or master bathroom can only be accessed through bedrooms. Lots of people move out when their kids get too big.


----------



## Manter (Oct 21, 2014)

shakespearegirl said:


> http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/property/london/archbishops-place/
> 
> Houses in this street have literally doubled in price in the last 4 years.


I think I looked at that before it was done up. If it's the one I think it is, good renovation (it was dark red when I went round- the attic bedroom was described as a retreat but felt more like a rebirthing experience. <<shudder>>) and great photography.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 23, 2014)

From a listing for a £415k one-bedroom flat in Josephine Avenue



A photo of the actual type of stupid picture you could have on the wall of your flat, in which you will float around whimsically, writing notes, collecting postcards (ones that you have written to yourself from your imaginary beach hut). Your alarm clock will be set to midday as you don't have a real job.



After a late lunch you will open a bottle of Champagne and idly spin the globe as you plan your next expedition, to buy trinkets, maybe in a bazaar in north Africa or maybe just in a pop-up on Coldharbour Lane.



Welcome to Brixton.


----------



## passivejoe (Oct 23, 2014)

teuchter said:


> From a listing for a £415k one-bedroom flat in Josephine Avenue
> 
> View attachment 62803
> 
> ...



Interior  design by the developer's bored wife? She may have been hibernating in Laura Ashley since the mid 90's and just woken up.


----------



## Belushi (Oct 23, 2014)

teuchter said:


> From a listing for a £415k one-bedroom flat in Josephine Avenue
> 
> View attachment 62803
> 
> ...



That's the beigest flat I've ever seen.


----------



## leanderman (Oct 23, 2014)

£749 sq ft


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Oct 23, 2014)

leanderman said:


> £749 sq ft


But each square foot carefully artisaned.


----------



## Leo Chesterton (Oct 24, 2014)

The heart bleeds.
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/oct/23/foxtons-shares-plunge-london-property-market-slows


----------



## leanderman (Oct 24, 2014)

Leo Chesterton said:


> The heart bleeds.
> http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/oct/23/foxtons-shares-plunge-london-property-market-slows



Interesting that estate agents say the proposed mansion tax is acting as a bit of a break on property prices. 

Which again suggests that property prices are high partly because taxes are low.


----------



## ska invita (Oct 28, 2014)

suggested halloween costume


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 28, 2014)

It's got great transport links! 

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/oct/28/this-passageway-in-south-london-just-sold-for-260000


----------



## Cowley (Nov 7, 2014)

ska invita said:


> suggested halloween costume


 
Just seen this


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 7, 2014)

sleaterkinney said:


> It's got great transport links!
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/oct/28/this-passageway-in-south-london-just-sold-for-260000



If that's where I'm thinking of, there used to be a row of lock-ups (all long-gone, demolished and built on) on one side of a mews through there, where stallholders at Northcote Rd market used to keep their stalls overnight.


----------



## oryx (Nov 7, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> If that's where I'm thinking of, there used to be a row of lock-ups (all long-gone, demolished and built on) on one side of a mews through there, where stallholders at Northcote Rd market used to keep their stalls overnight.



For some reason when I saw that (it's been posted widely on t'internet) I thought it was Clapham High St.!

I remember when Northcote Road was a normal market - not an artisan or organic thing in sight!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 7, 2014)

oryx said:


> For some reason when I saw that (it's been posted widely on t'internet) I thought it was Clapham High St.!
> 
> I remember when Northcote Road was a normal market - not an artisan or organic thing in sight!



Me too! I used to walk the length of the market (and much further!) twice a day on my way to and from secondary school in the '70s. The only slightly exotic stalls were the fish stall, and the couple down the Battersea Rise end of the market that catered for "West Indian" cuisine! The only vaguely "artisan" shop on the entire road was Dove's Butchers, and that was only because they were renowned London-wide for sourcing only the best game.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 7, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> Me too! I used to walk the length of the market (and much further!) twice a day on my way to and from secondary school in the '70s. The only slightly exotic stalls were the fish stall, and the couple down the Battersea Rise end of the market that catered for "West Indian" cuisine! The only vaguely "artisan" shop on the entire road was Dove's Butchers, and that was only because they were renowned London-wide for sourcing only the best game.


That's still there. Good butcher but pissingly dear cos their clientele are all bankers and the like now.


----------



## Winot (Nov 8, 2014)

Orang Utan said:


> That's still there. Good butcher but pissingly dear cos their clientele are all bankers and the like now.



And a bit mardy.


----------



## Ol Nick (Nov 10, 2014)

Winot said:


> And a bit mardy.


Not so many places you can get fresh mard down South.


----------



## CH1 (Jan 8, 2015)

There is a 4 bed house in HHR on offer for £940,000 Wednesday's Standard.
http://www.foxtons.co.uk/property-for-sale-in-herne-hill/chpk0685812
Is this an indicator of price decline, stasis or what?
winot leanderman


----------



## leanderman (Jan 8, 2015)

Good spot. 

Sister-in-law who has just moved house (Brixton to W Norwood) said her estate agent said the market is dead.


----------



## Smick (Jan 8, 2015)

leanderman said:


> Good spot.
> 
> Sister-in-law who has just moved house (Brixton to W Norwood) said her estate agent said the market is dead.


Could that be due to the time of year? To me, dead suggests that people just don't want to move, rather than they want to move but won't pay so much as last year's madness.


----------



## Cowley (Jan 8, 2015)

Smick said:


> Could that be due to the time of year? To me, dead suggests that people just don't want to move, rather than they want to move but won't pay so much as last year's madness.


 
Yeah probably the time of year, come April..Foxtons et al will be ramping up the prices just like they do every year.


----------



## Rushy (Jan 8, 2015)

I agree the market seems dead but that looks expensive to me. Even extended into the loft it's only just over 120sqm. Much much smaller than the terraces on Leander Road, for instance.


----------



## leanderman (Jan 8, 2015)

Rushy said:


> I agree the market seems dead but that looks expensive to me. Even extended into the loft it's only just over 120sqm. Much much smaller than the terraces on Leander Road, for instance.



But Charter School catchment. Families from Sudbourne area are among those increasingly targeting it.


----------



## leanderman (Jan 8, 2015)

Cowley said:


> Yeah probably the time of year, come April..Foxtons et al will be ramping up the prices just like they do every year.



And the conditions that have caused this madness are unlikely to change, not least ultra-low interest rates.


----------



## Mr Retro (Jan 8, 2015)

Is there anywhere left in South London that still represents value for money? I was looking at Tooting last weekend and even there the costs are unbelieveable. Love to buy a 2/3 bedroom place somewhere centralish that won't cripple us with a mortgage. Doesn't look possible.


----------



## Manter (Jan 8, 2015)

Tooting has been full of the nappy valley set for at least 8 years. You need to look at less fashionable areas


----------



## uk benzo (Jan 8, 2015)

Try Lower Sydenham.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 8, 2015)

Old Kent Rd.


----------



## Gramsci (Jan 8, 2015)

CH1 said:


> There is a 4 bed house in HHR on offer for £940,000 Wednesday's Standard.
> http://www.foxtons.co.uk/property-for-sale-in-herne-hill/chpk0685812
> Is this an indicator of price decline, stasis or what?
> winot leanderman



According to same edition of ES yes. Election coming up adding to uncertainty (?). 



> Is the boom in flogging pricey London homes sustainable? The City is not entirely convinced.
> 
> Credit Suisse has trimmed its earnings forecasts for upmarket estate agents Foxtons by 10%, warning that the year ahead is not looking as rosy as last.
> 
> The bank says the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors’ recent market survey points to a slow-down in activity, and the upcoming general election will only add to uncertainty in the property market. Foxtons tumbled 8.75p to 165.5p.



Must stop reading to ES. Its appalling. Article below on the "wobbly" share prices says that to look on the bright side Unions are weak. Apparently this is good as it will not stop "growth". 

Still Marx and Engels used to read the financial pages. It tells you what is happening and how our rulers see it.


----------



## leanderman (Jan 9, 2015)

Gramsci said:


> According to same edition of ES yes. Election coming up adding to uncertainty (?).
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The same Marx that speculated on the London stock exchange, while also living off Engels' family factory profits? (sorry!)


----------



## Gramsci (Jan 10, 2015)

leanderman said:


> The same Marx that speculated on the London stock exchange, while also living off Engels' family factory profits? (sorry!)



I have just finished Tristram Hunts biography of Engels. Yes it is the New Labour MP. A sympathetic introduction to Engels life and work.

Engels did not want to work in the family business. Circumstances led him to end up working in Manchester part of the family business. He was on the run from Europe due to his radical activities and ended up in London broke. His only way out working at his fathers mill. He regarded Marx as the superior to himself intellectually and supported Marx and his family financially through his work so Marx was free to write. He had not planned to work there for long but realised Marx, also in exile in London need financial support. He also used his wealth to support other socialists and socialist causes. He was always generous with his wealth. He retired early from the family business after his father died. Spending the rest of his life promoting and get published Marx works and supporting socialist movement.

I do not think Marx speculated on the stock exchange. Marx was pretty useless with money. Unlike Engels who died a wealthy man living in Primrose Hill. After Marx death Engels came to the fore again and his house was a centre for socialists seeking advice.

Engels, very unusually, for a man of his station had a long term relationship with a working class woman. He led a double life as an "English" foxhunting gentleman and spending time with his working class lover at his other house.

Engels and Marx were the opposite of the stereotypical dour political activist. Engels large house ( still there with a plaque) was every Sunday open to all. Engels loved drinking and entertaining.

BTW Engels wrote on housing. Have not finished this yet



> On June 26 1872, Engels contributed the first of a series of articles to the _Volksstaat_, entitled “The Housing Question.” The last appeared on February 22 1873. Engels’ central point was that the revolutionary class policy of the proletariat cannot be replaced by a policy of reforms, because "it is not that the solution of the housing question simultaneously solves the social question, but that only by the solution of the social question, that is, by the abolition of the capitalist mode of production, is the solution of the housing question made possible."



That is: The housing situation we are in now is due to living under Capitalism. Its should be no surprise that it is the way it is.

Engels the optimist always believed that it would be the working class that would bring about social change.


----------



## leanderman (Jan 10, 2015)

Gramsci said:


> I do not think Marx speculated on the stock exchange. Marx was pretty useless with money.



I've been to the Marx family house in Trier. Amazing place. 

My favourite essay by KM is 18th Brumaire. 

He excused his speculation on the stock exchange by saying he was 'relieving the enemy of his money'!


----------



## Manter (Jan 10, 2015)

Gramsci  he did speculate on the stock exchange. Try the Francis Wheen biography


----------



## CH1 (Jan 10, 2015)

Manter said:


> Gramsci  he did speculate on the stock exchange. Try the Francis Wheen biography


At least he didn't jump off his yacht leaving everyone in the lurch!


----------



## CH1 (Jan 10, 2015)

Gramsci said:


> BTW Engels wrote on housing. Have not finished this yet


That Engels piece is very intense for me - especially with my current post-Christmas concentration block.
It seems largely and attack on Proudhon, who I'd never heard off. On consulting Wikipedia Proudhon seems to be a French father of anarchism or decentralised socialism - considered to be in the same line as Tolstoy and Chomsky. 

Anyway it was remarkable how the housing crisis referred to by Engels has parallels with that of today - but then maybe some things never change, at least in rapidly expanding cities.

It looks as though Prouhon might have been a bid fan of the right to buy, and shared ownership, had he lived into Thatcherite times - at least according to my reading of this extract quoted by Engels:
As far, however, as this Proudhonist solution of the housing question contains any rational and practically applicable content it is already being carried out today, but this realization does not spring from “the womb of the revolutionary idea,” but from the big bourgeois himself. Let us listen to an excellent Spanish newspaper, _La Emancipacion_, of Madrid of March 16, 1872:

“There is still another means of solving the housing question, the way proposed by Proudhon, which dazzles at first glance, but on closer examination reveals its utter impotence. Proudhon proposed that the tenants should be converted into purchasers by installments, so that the rent paid annually would be reckoned as an installment on the payment of the value of the dwelling, and, after a certain time, the tenant would become the owner of the dwelling. This means, which Proudhon considered very revolutionary, is being put into operation in all countries by companies of speculators who thus secure double and treble payment of the value of the houses by raising the rents. M. Dollfus and other big manufacturers in Northeastern France have carried out this system not only in order to make money, but in addition, with a political idea at the back of their minds.

“The cleverest leaders of the ruling class have always directed their efforts towards increasing the number of small property owners in order to build an army for themselves against the proletariat. The bourgeois revolutions of the last century divided up the big estates of the nobility and the church into small properties, just as the Spanish republicans propose to do today with the still existing large estates, and created thereby a class of small landowners which has since become the most reactionary element in society and a permanent hindrance to the revolutionary movement of the urban proletariat. Napoleon III aimed at creating a similar class in the towns by reducing the size of the individual bonds of the public debt, and M. Dollfus and his colleagues sought to stifle all revolutionary spirit in their workers by selling them small dwellings to be paid for in annual installments, and at the same time to chain the workers by this property to the factory in which they work. Thus we see that the Proudhon plan has not merely failed to bring the working class any relief, it has even turned directly against it.”


----------



## leanderman (Jan 11, 2015)

Proudhon: my first love! (Circa 1987))


----------



## CH1 (Jan 11, 2015)

leanderman said:


> Proudhon: my first love! (Circa 1987))


In my youth Trotsky ruled student politics absolutely. Its all a bit new to me.


----------



## leanderman (Jan 11, 2015)

Foxtons car driving through Windrush square earlier.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 11, 2015)

Gramsci said:


> He was on the run from Europe due to his radical activities and ended up in London broke. His only way out working at his fathers mill.


Sounds broadly in line with the archetypal Brixton Forum poster.


----------



## Gramsci (Jan 11, 2015)

teuchter said:


> Sounds broadly in line with the archetypal Brixton Forum poster.



Have you nothing better to do than post up here to wind people up?


----------



## Gramsci (Jan 11, 2015)

CH1 said:


> That Engels piece is very intense for me - especially with my current post-Christmas concentration block.
> It seems largely and attack on Proudhon, who I'd never heard off. On consulting Wikipedia Proudhon seems to be a French father of anarchism or decentralised socialism - considered to be in the same line as Tolstoy and Chomsky.



I have only read first section. The biography of Engels does explain the internecine arguments of the time. Engels and Marx lay into Proudhon as his form of socialism was at that time more influential than Marxism. Proudhon is rather forgotten now but in his day he was well known.


----------



## SpamMisery (Jan 11, 2015)

Can we have less Engels and more Foxtons please


----------



## Manter (Jan 11, 2015)

SpamMisery said:


> Can we have less Engels and more Foxtons please


Despite my degree I am inclined to agree


----------



## peterkro (Jan 11, 2015)

Gramsci said:


> I have only read first section. The biography of Engels does explain the internecine arguments of the time. Engels and Marx lay into Proudhon as his form of socialism was at that time more influential than Marxism. Proudhon is rather forgotten now but in his day he was well known.


He's not forgotten by a lot of people,he may have been wrong on some things be he was amongst the first to figure out some major political ideas.


----------



## CH1 (Jan 11, 2015)

SpamMisery said:


> Can we have less Engels and more Foxtons please


This is my favourite 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




The only example I can think of where Foxtons (and 4 fellow agents) are being used by an owner to thwart several years of council effort to try to get a derelict property back into use.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 12, 2015)

teuchter said:


> Sounds broadly in line with the archetypal Brixton Forum poster.



As Engels might say, "_halt den maul, du fotze_".


----------



## Mr Retro (Jan 14, 2015)

Foxtons, who we are renting through have been on to say they will be around to inspect the place. Fair enough, this is in the contract and I welcome it so there will be no hassle when we fuck off.  

However despite eleventy ten requests we don't yet have an inventory. So what's the point in the inspection when they have nothing to compare the state of the flat against. We could knock down the gable end and tell them this is what it was like when we moved in.


----------



## el-ahrairah (Jan 14, 2015)

you should try it and see what happens.


----------



## Rushy (Jan 14, 2015)

Mr Retro said:


> Foxtons, who we are renting through have been on to say they will be around to inspect the place. Fair enough, this is in the contract and I welcome it so there will be no hassle when we fuck off.
> 
> However despite eleventy ten requests we don't yet have an inventory. So what's the point in the inspection when they have nothing to compare the state of the flat against. We could knock down the gable end and tell them this is what it was like when we moved in.


This is in your favour.


----------



## Mr Retro (Jan 14, 2015)

el-ahrairah said:


> you should try it and see what happens.


Bit cold though. I'll wait until the clocks go forward.


----------



## Mr Retro (Jan 14, 2015)

Rushy said:


> This is in your favour.


I agree. I'd rather things were done as they are supposed to though. Probably just been living in the Netherlands too long.

It irritates me that Foxtons are probably charging the owners a fuck load to rent the place out for them but not giving the owners what they promised them. As I say we could have thrashed the place and there would be no come back. Or we could make it very difficult at least.


----------



## Cowley (Jan 15, 2015)

Mr Retro said:


> *Is there anywhere left in South London that still represents value for money? * I was looking at Tooting last weekend and even there the costs are unbelieveable. Love to buy a 2/3 bedroom place somewhere centralish that won't cripple us with a mortgage. Doesn't look possible.


 
Nowhere. Seriously...long gone are the days where you could escape to Zone 3/4 and buy a nice House for a reasonable price.

Saying that, the current generation have no problems splashing Half A Million on a 2 bed Victorian flat. It's bonkers IMO.


----------



## Manter (Jan 20, 2015)

Cowley said:


> Nowhere. Seriously...long gone are the days where you could escape to Zone 3/4 and buy a nice House for a reasonable price.
> 
> Saying that, the current generation have no problems splashing Half A Million on a 2 bed Victorian flat. It's bonkers IMO.


On which planet does the current generation have no problem with that?  Most can't do it and those that do are often doing it with help and reluctance because they feel they have no choice


----------



## CH1 (Feb 5, 2015)

Latest from the Brixton branch of Foxtons.
Handy for appointments at Kings' College Hospital, the Corner Surgery (triage only) and if it all gets too much, the Maudsley:
£545,000 (? Leanderman, Winot, Rushy)
http://www.foxtons.co.uk/property-for-sale-in-camberwell/chpk0596137


----------



## Mr Retro (Feb 5, 2015)

CH1 said:


> Latest from the Brixton branch of Foxtons.
> Handy for appointments at Kings' College Hospital, the Corner Surgery (triage only) and if it all gets too much, the Maudsley:
> £545,000 (? Leanderman, Winot, Rushy)
> http://www.foxtons.co.uk/property-for-sale-in-camberwell/chpk0596137
> View attachment 67276


Glad they fenced that aggressive looking fucking tv off.


----------



## leanderman (Feb 5, 2015)

CH1 said:


> Latest from the Brixton branch of Foxtons.
> Handy for appointments at Kings' College Hospital, the Corner Surgery (triage only) and if it all gets too much, the Maudsley:
> £545,000 (? Leanderman, Winot, Rushy)
> http://www.foxtons.co.uk/property-for-sale-in-camberwell/chpk0596137
> View attachment 67276



£752 sq ft


----------



## CH1 (Feb 5, 2015)

leanderman said:


> £752 sq ft


A quick glance at Zoopla suggests that might be reasonable. Very definitely Camberwell not Brixton though.


----------



## Manter (Feb 5, 2015)

Mr Retro said:


> Glad they fenced that aggressive looking fucking tv off.


I am more interested in what's stuffed under the bed


----------



## Winot (Feb 5, 2015)

CH1 said:


> Latest from the Brixton branch of Foxtons.
> Handy for appointments at Kings' College Hospital, the Corner Surgery (triage only) and if it all gets too much, the Maudsley:
> £545,000 (? Leanderman, Winot, Rushy)
> http://www.foxtons.co.uk/property-for-sale-in-camberwell/chpk0596137



Thanks for tagging me but I am afraid that my insight into property prices is limited to the "fuck me that's a lot".


----------



## Manter (Feb 5, 2015)




----------



## Winot (Feb 5, 2015)

Manter said:


> I am more interested in what's stuffed under the bed



All the stuff they couldn't fit under the oven.


----------



## Manter (Feb 5, 2015)

Winot said:


> All the stuff they couldn't fit under the oven.


Didn't notice that!


----------



## teuchter (Feb 5, 2015)

Mr Retro said:


> Glad they fenced that aggressive looking fucking tv off.


I think it's the pot plant that must be aggressive, as it has its own cage (plus interrogation lamp) in addition.


----------



## Rushy (Feb 5, 2015)

CH1 said:


> Latest from the Brixton branch of Foxtons.
> Handy for appointments at Kings' College Hospital, the Corner Surgery (triage only) and if it all gets too much, the Maudsley:
> £545,000 (? Leanderman, Winot, Rushy)
> http://www.foxtons.co.uk/property-for-sale-in-camberwell/chpk0596137
> View attachment 67276


Weirdly, I did not receive your alert - nothing there.
I'm not sure why I was tagged?


----------



## CH1 (Feb 5, 2015)

Rushy said:


> Weirdly, I did not receive your alert - nothing there.
> I'm not sure why I was tagged?


I tagged those who normally comment on the price/value/quality of properties in the area. A minority taste I know, but I was wanting to know how maisonettes in Bavent Road compared in your humble opinions.


----------



## Cowley (Feb 9, 2015)

Manter said:


> On which planet does the current generation have no problem with that?  Most can't do it and those that do are often doing it with help and reluctance because they feel they have no choice


 
Nobody likes spending vast amounts of money on Property and nobody is forced to either.

The fact that "some" people are "willing" to part with 500K to live in a Quarter of a House in most parts of Zone 2 London is beyond comprehension IMO.  Regardless of whether they are bank rolled by the "bank of mummy and daddy" or not, the sums of money for a first time buy are simply ludicrous given the type of property that you are purchasing.

I accept the situation is dire...but nobody is forced to buy a house and not at these sums.  We all have choices.


----------



## Smick (Feb 9, 2015)

Cowley said:


> Nobody likes spending vast amounts of money on Property and nobody is forced to either.
> 
> The fact that "some" people are "willing" to part with 500K to live in a Quarter of a House in most parts of Zone 2 London is beyond comprehension IMO.  Regardless of whether they are bank rolled by the "bank of mummy and daddy" or not, the sums of money for a first time buy are simply ludicrous given the type of property that you are purchasing.
> 
> I accept the situation is dire...but nobody is forced to buy a house and not at these sums.  We all have choices.


If we hadn't bought when we did, in 2011, we'd never have been able to buy in this area now. Our rent would have increased to several hundred more than we are now paying on rent.

The choice I could see was pay high rent with no guaranteed tenure, buy an expensive flat or else move out to the sticks, live in a boring ukip town and pay several times my monthly mortgage payment for an annual train ticket.

If I had the choice of a reasonably priced council property with a guarantee that I could stay there as long as I needed it, I'd have taken that. But that seemed like a lottery win.

What is your housing situation Cowley?


----------



## Cowley (Feb 12, 2015)

Smick said:


> If we hadn't bought when we did, in 2011, we'd never have been able to buy in this area now. Our rent would have increased to several hundred more than we are now paying on rent.
> 
> The choice I could see was pay high rent with no guaranteed tenure, buy an expensive flat or else move out to the sticks, live in a boring ukip town and pay several times my monthly mortgage payment for an annual train ticket.
> 
> ...


 
I understand where you are coming from Smick and in some ways are in the same situation.

I've been a house owner since 2000, I initially bought a 1 bed in Stockwell, sold, then bought a 2 bed on a road off Brixton Hill, then sold and bought a 3 bed house in Streatham where I have been since 2006.

I admit it was a lot easier/affordable back when I bought, it wasn't cheap...but the prices were a lot more in line with your average wage/cost of living, I.E the cost of property being 4 times greater than the salary me and my Fiancee earnt.  I have managed to move up the ladder each time due to HPI but have moved further out each time.  Rents were pretty crazy back when I bought too, but buying definitely made more sense at the time from a financial point of view.

My mini rant was due to me seeing the young having this obsession with having to live in Zone 2/near to Central London, especially given the crazy house prices and rents....

These days Brixton is a "prime" area for the young and trendy, to buy in Brixton or many areas in Zone 2 is a luxury.  It's out of reach of many people so you move somewhere further out, not necessarily out into the sticks, but to an area slightly further out that is less glamourous.

When I was buying my first property in 2000 I would have quite liked to live in Central London, I accepted that I couldn't afford it and bought a place where I grew up in Stockwell.

When I hear people say, people have no choice it's clearly not true...what people need to do is be realistic about where they can afford to live be it buying or renting.


----------



## Smick (Feb 12, 2015)

Because we're not from London, we wanted to be in as interesting and diverse community as possible. I'm in danger of sounding like Foxtons myself here, but to me, there was no point in moving to England at all to live in the Home Counties. I've got friends in Hertfordshire, Billericay, Tunbridge Wells. Admittedly,I haven't  been to visit most of them, but the thought makes my skin crawl.

Most friends living outside the M25 know fewer of their neighbours than I do. And you go to their one good pub and it costs a fortune for a burger and a pint. And the reason? It's close to London. Doesn't make sense to me that close to London is more expensive than actual London.

So when I came here, I did what I could to live as close to town, and as close to a neighbourhood which had a bit of life as possible.


----------



## leanderman (Feb 12, 2015)

Cowley said:


> My mini rant was due to me seeing the young having this obsession with having to live in Zone 2/near to Central London, especially given the crazy house prices and rents....
> When I hear people say, people have no choice it's clearly not true...what people need to do is be realistic about where they can afford to live be it buying or renting.



I don't think any of the young people you talk about would disagree with you.

They know the facts, that they can get more for less further out.

But if they want to live close in, they have no choice but to pay crazy money.


----------



## Smick (Feb 12, 2015)

leanderman said:


> I don't think any of the young people you talk about would disagree with you.
> 
> They know the facts, that they can get more for less further out.
> 
> But if they want to live close in, they have no choice but to pay crazy money.


If I were a youngster, I'd rather live in a bedsit in Brixton, Stockwell, Camberwell than have a two bed out in Croydon.

You're only young once.


----------



## Manter (Feb 12, 2015)

Smick said:


> If I were a youngster, I'd rather live in a bedsit in Brixton, Stockwell, Camberwell than have a two bed out in Croydon.
> 
> You're only young once.


God yes, this.


----------



## Cowley (Mar 5, 2015)

leanderman said:


> I don't think any of the young people you talk about would disagree with you.
> 
> They know the facts, that they can get more for less further out.
> 
> But if they want to live close in, they have no choice but to pay crazy money.



Which is exactly the point I made, youngsters don't have a problem paying through the earth to live centrally.


----------



## Cowley (Mar 5, 2015)

Smick said:


> If I were a youngster, I'd rather live in a bedsit in Brixton, Stockwell, Camberwell than have a two bed out in Croydon.
> 
> You're only young once.



I would and I'm not a youngster.  I don't think the choice needs to be living in Zone 2 or living in Zone 6 but using comparisons like that makes the debate pretty much redundant.


----------



## Mapped (Mar 17, 2015)

We've now got them at the other end of the Victoria line. I think they opened on estate agents row in Walthamstow last week and they've already got 2 houses on for over £900k.  Absolutely mental.

This is the bathroom for one they've got on for £995k. Gorgeous isn't it? 

http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?location_ids=856&property_id=932114







My retired neighbour is being forced out of her home by her deceased partner's daughter and probably won't be able to get anywhere locally now with this property market madness


----------



## trabuquera (Mar 17, 2015)

^ fraternal greetings from the other end of the line.
that place ^^ is eyeball-bleeding hideous (and worn and shabby) throughout but 5 bedrooms in a single house? for under a million quid? That sort of thing's been outlawed (or just made prohibitively expensive) in Lambeth for YEARS darling.

ETA: and who has a bedroom almost completely lined with mirrored wardrobes, then carpets their mantelpiece with multiple crucifixes?
<shivers>


----------



## Manter (Mar 17, 2015)

Detached and five bedroom with a decent garden and a garage- I am tempted to say bargain, but I know that's just long-term-London-resident distortion. 

I am fascinated by the bizarre panelled window-less room.... The wardrobe in the bathroom..... The black shelves in the living room (my eyes!).... But the thing that disturbs me most is that the radiator in the blue bedroom is not centralised under the window. Just wrong.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 17, 2015)

Manter said:


> Detached and five bedroom with a decent garden and a garage- I am tempted to say bargain, but I know that's just long-term-London-resident distortion.


I also thought "well that's not so bad" until I realised that I had London Stockholm Syndrome and that it was a shitty house miles from the station ruthlessly subdivided to boost the bedroom count.


----------



## Manter (Mar 17, 2015)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I also thought "well that's not so bad" until I realised that I had London Stockholm Syndrome and that it was a shitty house miles from the station ruthlessly subdivided to boost the bedroom count.


And it has an unforgivable radiator


----------



## Mapped (Mar 17, 2015)

It is a detached house (with a dodgy radiator) in a nice bit of town, right next to Epping Forest and a private school, but £1m houses aren't a thing in this bit of London yet, especially ones that need tonnes of work. Looking at zoopla the most expensive transaction at the moment is just over £800k

I don't think we're suffering from London Stockholm Syndrome to the same extent as you guys, it was relatively cheap round here until quite recently.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 17, 2015)

Tbh the practical difference between 800K and 1m is very little, given that both fall into the "couldn't possibly afford it ever, imaginary money" category.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 17, 2015)

I was also talking about the change in the cycle these days, which may be worth starting a thread about.

Old cycle: cheap area identified -> people without much money start to buy in that area -> gentrification, prices go up -> people without much money start to buy in different areas -> cycle repeats elsewhere. That's pretty familiar.

New cycle: everywhere anywhere near London rises in price pretty much equally regardless of anything else, and everywhere gets worse with local amenities sold off to be demolished so flats can be built there.


----------



## cuppa tee (Apr 26, 2015)

_" This single private parking space is enviably situated behind a secure gated entrance and boasts a fabulous location close to a variety of amenities.
_
*KEY FEATURES*

_Private single parking space_
_Secure gated entrance_
_Accompanies a beautiful development_
_Great location_
_Close to shops and restaurants_
_Transport links are moments away_
*LOCAL AREA*
_Strathleven Road is perfectly located for the shops, restaurants and amenities of Acre Lane and for a more comprehensive range, Brixton Road is not far away. Transport links include, Brixton Rail and Underground and Clapham North Underground stations."_


http://www.foxtons.co.uk/property-for-sale-in-brixton/chpk4056999


----------



## editor (Apr 26, 2015)

cuppa tee said:


> View attachment 70753
> 
> 
> This single private parking space is enviably situated behind a secure gated entrance and boasts a fabulous location close to a variety of amenities.
> ...


That is outrageous. I've shared it on Buzz. 

And just to bring the thread up to date: 






Reclaim Brixton: Foxtons estate agents in Brixton is targeted again


----------



## editor (Apr 26, 2015)

Just when you thought you couldn't hate them any more:



> I walk into estate agents Foxtons Brixton branch. I pretend my parents have given me £400,000 and I say I want to buy a house close to the tube. I'm greeted enthusiastically in a room that’s so clean and white I feel as if I’m covered in dirt.
> 
> In 2013, the opening of this branch sparked protests and the words "Yuppies Out" were scrawled across its windows.
> 
> A man who seems as if he was born to be in sales – with a perfect quiff and a lopsided smirk – says he is ready to help me in any way he can. He quickly tries to convince me to buy an "ex-local" property; flats which were once owned by the council. Apparently young people like me are buying them more and more and there's loads of them round here "as you can imagine", he says gleefully. "In the next few years Brixton will all be private housing. I promise you."


http://www.newstatesman.com/politic...ion-brixton-who-wins-who-loses-and-whos-blame


----------



## editor (Apr 26, 2015)

The morning after: Brixton Foxtons at 8am Sunday.


----------



## Greebo (Apr 26, 2015)

editor said:


> The morning after: Brixton Foxtons at 8am Sunday.


They'll be back, like rats, mildew, or a retrovirus.


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Apr 26, 2015)

editor said:


> The morning after: Brixton Foxtons at 8am Sunday.



That's fucking hilarious.


----------



## simonSW2 (May 6, 2015)

I've just had the depressing misfortune to observe that Obnoxtons have a 2 bed flat on Lambert Road on for £850k.

http://m.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/36717040?search_identifier=294110d9060adef2131961e0c3b64472

jesus.


----------



## Smick (May 6, 2015)

Do they achieve the prices which they advertise or do they give an inflated asking price to attract sellers?


----------



## SpamMisery (May 6, 2015)

Two up, two down with garden and double garage. Looks alright, seems a decent standard of decoration


----------



## technical (May 6, 2015)

Possibly within the catchment area for sudbourne school, which would explain the inflated price


----------



## gdubz (May 6, 2015)

Smick said:


> Do they achieve the prices which they advertise or do they give an inflated asking price to attract sellers?


No; yes


----------



## SpamMisery (May 6, 2015)

Is that true gdubz?  I've wanted to see the data comparison from land registry etc but not known where to look (i.e I have no intention of doing the donkey work myself )


----------



## CH1 (May 6, 2015)

Smick said:


> Do they achieve the prices which they advertise or do they give an inflated asking price to attract sellers?


They knocked one down opposite me (Coldharbour Lane, Loughborough Park conservation area) from £599,950 to £450,000 last year.

Foxtons just treat property like stocks and shares - they have no particular issue with overcharging - it is after all to the benefit of their client, the seller, and their own bonuses.

So their modus operand must be to constantly test the market in an upwards direction.

Actually it would make sense if house and flat prices were government regulated - but I can't see it being a vote winner.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 6, 2015)

CH1 said:


> Actually it would make sense if house and flat prices were government regulated - but I can't see it being a vote winner.


Not amongst selfish potential sellers/speculators certainly, which is the only market the parties care about it seems. Given that so many of their backers have put their money in the property bubble.


----------



## CH1 (May 7, 2015)

Unusually Foxtons are advertising a Brixton property in this Wednesday's Standard.
I thought from the description it might be a recycled offer of a "house" adjacent to the Academy queue.

It isn't that - this is new, a house betwixt Austin Osman Spare and the SW9 sorting office in Wynne Road for £699,950 :  


details here: http://www.foxtons.co.uk/property-for-sale-in-brixton/chpk3467082
Looks like a snip compared to Lambert Road - especially if you take into account the heating costs. But presumably schools might be a problem?


----------



## 299 old timer (May 7, 2015)

simonSW2 said:


> I've just had the depressing misfortune to observe that Obnoxtons have a 2 bed flat on Lambert Road on for £850k.
> 
> http://m.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/36717040?search_identifier=294110d9060adef2131961e0c3b64472
> 
> jesus.



Chancers

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/house-pr...rchLocation=Lambert+Road&referrer=landingPage


----------



## Rushy (May 7, 2015)

299 old timer said:


> Chancers
> 
> http://www.rightmove.co.uk/house-prices/detail.html?country=england&locationIdentifier=STREET^1973014&searchLocation=Lambert+Road&referrer=landingPage


A friend very recently sold their 3 bed garden flat on Lambert for 760k. Shortly after their neighbour who also sold for about 740.


----------



## 299 old timer (May 7, 2015)

Rushy said:


> A friend very recently sold their 3 bed garden flat on Lambert for 760k. Shortly after their neighbour who also sold for about 740.



As I said chancers - 2 bed flat 850k? Still, some mug will buy it. On another hill equidistant to Brixton one could pick up a 3 bed HOUSE for £650k...


----------



## cuppa tee (May 8, 2015)

coincidence..............?


----------



## SpamMisery (May 8, 2015)

No. Lots of companies share price went up. For lots of reasons however.


----------



## editor (May 8, 2015)

The world would be a better place without Foxtons.


----------



## CH1 (May 9, 2015)

cuppa tee said:


> coincidence..............?


I would have said it definitely was a reaction to Tory win.
Labour had pledged to start regulating the private rental market - which would have curtailed Foxton's license to print money.


----------



## Gramsci (May 9, 2015)

CH1 said:


> I would have said it definitely was a reaction to Tory win.
> Labour had pledged to start regulating the private rental market - which would have curtailed Foxton's license to print money.



Evening "Tory" Standard had a few articles on the property market/ foxtons in run up to election.



* Foxtons sales slide as election fears hit London housing market *





Bogged down: Sales volumes in the housing market are declining, say Foxtons







> Foxtons, renowned for its aggressive sales tactics and fleet of green Minis, said political uncertainty over the next few months — with the prospect of a hung parliament or even another election — meant its sales in the capital would remain “subdued”.
> 
> The company is the latest in a string of estate agents to warn of a flattening market.
> 
> ...



Always worth reading the ES business pages.

Good thing Red Ed was not elected and good sense can prevail again.


----------



## editor (May 23, 2015)

A tiny studio flat on Electric Avenue for £1000 a month + £1385 deposit + admin fee of £420? Cunts.

http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?key...=map&search_type=LL&sold=1&submit_type=search


----------



## shifting gears (May 23, 2015)

editor said:


> A tiny studio flat on Electric Avenue for £1000 a month + £1385 deposit + admin fee of £420? Cunts.
> 
> http://www.foxtons.co.uk/search?key...=map&search_type=LL&sold=1&submit_type=search



£420 admin fee?

They can shove it up their arse for nothing and fuck off while they're doing it.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jun 9, 2015)

channel 4 news bit on foxtons (and one or two other agents) this evening - not very complimentary...

mainly seems to be news since it's now landlords claiming they are being ripped off.  

Although one or two tenants' viewpoints as well, and some pictures of the brixton office as it was 'remodelled' a month or so back - C4 will probably put up a video chunk some time in the next day or so


----------



## StoneRoad (Jun 11, 2015)

'Kinell

petition on change.org
Foxtons have anti-homeless spikes at the Holborn site ...


Please sign !

trying get link ...

https://www.change.org/p/foxtons-re..._Y0Jwoy1rTchSXlAJ5Js7xXHHRGlWwfQKvXJwv4ngMDY=


----------



## Belushi (Jun 17, 2015)

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jun/17/is-foxtons-the-estate-agent-london-deserves


----------



## CH1 (Jun 22, 2015)

Belushi said:


> http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jun/17/is-foxtons-the-estate-agent-london-deserves


Wonderful quote from that article: A former sales negotiator added: “It becomes exceptionally difficult to maintain bonds and relationships with people outside [Foxtons] EVEN IF YOU LIVE WITH THEM.”


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 22, 2015)

Given the staff are working 60 hours a week plus alternate weekends, I'm not convinced that Foxton's are meeting minimum wage levels if the basic salary is £10k per annum for many of them.


----------



## BigMoaner (Jun 23, 2015)

boohoo said:


> No - it looks like it sold the end of last year. It's one of a few house left from a little hamlet near Crown Point. Some lovely properties and I think last year were still quite cheap.


My patents live in one of the cottages there. You'll see the millwall sticker in the car wimdow!


----------



## CH1 (Jul 9, 2015)

Anyone have any views on this charming 3 bed house in Elm Park SW2 at £899,950 featured in yesterday's Evening Standard.
http://www.foxtons.co.uk/property-for-sale-in-brixton/chpk2578404
Some nice original fireplaces I see.
Is it a snip? Does it indicate prices are stabilising or still going up?


----------



## leanderman (Jul 9, 2015)

CH1 said:


> Anyone have any views on this charming 3 bed house in Elm Park SW2 at £899,950 featured in yesterday's Evening Standard.
> http://www.foxtons.co.uk/property-for-sale-in-brixton/chpk2578404
> Some nice original fireplaces I see.
> Is it a snip? Does it indicate prices are stabilising or still going up?



£773/sq ft.

Suggests prices are stabilising despite the much-vaunted election bounce.

One can only hope that Osborne's surprise attack on buy-to-letters and non-doms will see prices actually fall.


----------



## SpamMisery (Jul 9, 2015)

How weird. I checked the map for Elm Park and spotted Leander Rd close by. All this time, I've thought of Landor Rd, not Leander Rd, every time I've seen leanderman's nick


----------



## teuchter (Jul 9, 2015)

Seems rather expensive for what looks like a pretty standard house.


----------



## leanderman (Jul 13, 2015)

Luxury flats are so last year.

We have now joined the world of 'boutique collections' and 'lateral apartments'.

(Josephine Avenue)


----------



## uk benzo (Jul 13, 2015)

leanderman said:


> Luxury flats are so last year.
> 
> We have now joined the world of 'boutique collections' and 'lateral apartments'.
> 
> (Josephine Avenue)



I bet the writer creamed his/her pants as they wrote that.


----------



## Sister Midnight (Jul 13, 2015)

Where will they fit all that housing on Josephine Ave?!


----------



## leanderman (Jul 13, 2015)

Sister Midnight said:


> Where will they fit all that housing on Josephine Ave?!



Old job centre


----------



## editor (Jul 14, 2015)

Another police guard for Foxtons tonight.


----------



## editor (Jul 14, 2015)

Brixton’s most hated business? Foxtons finds itself in need of another police guard


----------



## editor (Jul 14, 2015)

leanderman said:


> Luxury flats are so last year.
> 
> We have now joined the world of 'boutique collections' and 'lateral apartments'.
> 
> (Josephine Avenue)


WTF is a lateral apartment?


----------



## organicpanda (Jul 14, 2015)

editor said:


> WTF is a lateral apartment?


bungalow?


----------



## Belushi (Jul 14, 2015)

editor said:


> WTF is a lateral apartment?



I think it means across the front of a building.


----------



## Belushi (Jul 14, 2015)

Apparently Londoners are discovering it

http://www.homesandproperty.co.uk/home-garden/architecture/londoners-discover-lateral-living


----------



## Winot (Jul 14, 2015)

editor said:


> WTF is a lateral apartment?



It means an apartment where the sale price knocks you sideways.


----------



## editor (Jul 14, 2015)

Belushi said:


> Apparently Londoners are discovering it
> 
> http://www.homesandproperty.co.uk/home-garden/architecture/londoners-discover-lateral-living


Ah, lateral is the new luxury.


----------



## Sister Midnight (Jul 14, 2015)

Low ceilinged small windowed pokey modem flat aka "luxury flat"


----------



## teuchter (Jul 14, 2015)

They are a response to the housing we have in London which is a legacy of the anti-socialistic tendencies intrinsic to the English. They insist on having their own front door so we end up with terraces of tall narrow houses instead of apartment buildings as is normal in the cities of culturally superior nations such as those on the continent or to take a random example Scotland.

These houses become particularly inefficient when they are split into flats vertically, so as that article explains if there is a possibility to run apartments horizontally it's often the best solution.


----------

