Ferdinand

Is netting worth a retrofit? I hate to think how much I would need. It could be 100m.

Funny tenant story. Having interred mum in the graveyard before Christmas, and having risen from what felt like my own deathbed with the 6 week Christmas lurgy, I went to visit long term tenants to check for storm damage and maintenance needs. The front window installed by the person who restored it before I bought is leaking so my 2G man needs to seal it properly. They have installed a stud wall across the former archway in their double lounge because the 3 sproglets have reached the age of 2-4 where they make enough racket that mother wants peace and a closed door sometimes. Bit of a surprise. Tried to contact me but I have been a little incommunicado. For these particular Ts it is fine as they found the house (1910-ish 3 real double bedrooms under 100k 3 years ago - very unusual even here) and there is a side deal where they get to buy the house from me when they can afford it, and in the meantime it means that I get a cared for house, and they are able to make modest adaptations by agreement, or I do and it will be covered in the sale price. He is a trained builder, and I have trained him a bit on detail-obsession. I was not expecting a new wall to come from Santa, mind. I think this qualifies as self-build . Ferdinand

Slightly tangential MIke, however for my 10kWp array (installed pre-G99), the installing company did all the paperwork including the grid connection forms. Are you self-doing all of this, or can you draw on a similar resource? F

I have a SS Franke Mythos, which I like and have had for about 5 years. Retail about £600, but I looked around and paid £400. Came with nice metal drainer to go over half sink or half of main sink, plus a glass thing on runner - maybe for peeling etc. And a deep lip around the sink and drainer, which I value. I think one of your criteria should be a thickness of 0.9mm or 1mm not 0.7mm. I have an extendi-tap which is good - B&Q half price in a sale. I think solid taps are worth spending some on, as they get used so much. Ferdinand

My take on Council Housing is different. I do not believe that Councils should run *any* housing. Too many conflicts of interest. I think that local politicians having potential control over particularly allocation of housing is an open door to corruption, and I think evidence shows that this happens, and that the honesty of local politicians faced with such temptations is put at risk. Where the same organisation is responsible for allocating such huge individual benefits, and also needs the votes of those people, the conflict of interest is just too great. Some may think that is an insult to Councillors. I say Councillors are human beings with feet of clay, just like the rest of us, and one key to honest administration is to prevent dishonest administration offering benefits. 5 days ago a member of the Royal Borough of Greenwich Housing Scrutiny Committee was found guilty of defrauding the Council of £67,000 by obtaining a Council House through Fraud by False Representation. That is a 4 year Councillor, and there is always a constant stream of such stories. The Councillor concerned owns 3 other (at least one substandard with vermin) houses rented out privately. An example of my second previous point. I think that creating monolithic estates of tenure is partly an exercise in trying to build voting blocks, beholden to particular political tendencies. Now, both of those points sound perhaps one sided - however remember that Lady Shirley Porter and the "Homes for Votes" episode, which was also about gerrymandering from the other side. The opportunity for this to happen should not exist. For these reasons I am also highly suspicious of attempts to frame a debate as Private Rental vs Council Housing, entirely ignoring Registered Social Providers. That feels like an attempt to being to reintroduce the type of gerrymandering I have excoriated above. Why should these people want to create conflicts of interest in Councils? I am a fan of the Right to Buy, as it gave 2 million households a potential escape from dependence, micro-control by politicians, and poverty, which is worth its weight in gold. It also started the process of breaking up all those monolithic blocks of tenure; also valuable. I think the failure was failing to replace stock, and also of tackling abuses - which could have been done; but I have some sympathy with Mrs Thatcher's failure to do so via local Councils, as throughout the 1980s (iirc) there were a lot of somewhat (!) rogue Councils out there imo. I think the people who failed to grasp the nettle were particularly Mr Major and then Mr Blair. My take is that: 1 - Social housing should be built and managed away from polticians, by law. 2 - Councils have a proper input on policy, but their input on individual decisions should be questioned. I can tell some horror stories about unlawful actions wrt private rentals by Councils, where unlawful actions have been taken because they can with virtual impunity, reckless as to the interest of the tenant concerned. 3 - Councils have a role as customer for new housing, and scrutineer for those running the,. Direct Labour organisations should remain part of history. 4 - If they are run by Registered Providers, then small estates are OK. I am undecided about RTB for Housing Associations. 5 - But the current practise of putting small numbers of social houses in other estates where suitable is probably better, as is the practise of Housing Associations buying individual houses on the open market. Other BHers disagree with this view, and we have argued it before. One other issue is rich people staying in Council Houses, when policy for at least 20 years (and I think a lot longer) has been needs-based allocation. Should people in the top 5% (say) of incomes be able to keep a Council House when they can afford their own and someone is in a B&B waiting? The usual argument is "Council Houses are for everyone for life", but that has not been policy for decades. I am not entirely clear in my view about this, but it is partially also a supply issue - back to Major and Blair. Ferdinand

An Amazon Echo Gen 3 is on order. They seem to be popular - delivery date is 16 March, and I am in Amazon Prime. China Syndrome?

If you have the PD rights, and it is within them, yes. But check.

.

Has this updated - what do I buy now? Sonos are not on the list. ? Does an Amazon Studio beat 2 x Amazon Echo Gen 3 ? Opinions welcome. I think I will start with a single Amazon Echo G3. Beyond that, I am drawn to the OontZ Angle 3 Ultra for the next room if they turn out to work together. Ferdinand

Welcome to the matrix.

Thinking laterally about this, I am reminded of a column by a characterful writer of pungent (provocative?) opinions called LJK Setright who wrote for Car Magazine for 30+ years, and was right often enough that disagreeing was slightly perilous. I remember him noting that he had kept a TV out of his house for years until one came in non-negotiably with the wife. In one column he pointed out the full width "touring" screen option for a sports car, then aero screens, then that windscreens could become so small that they could just be driving goggles. If you proposed that the boss embrace ear plugs and a sleep mask, rather than windows and curtains, it would make your ventilation problem much simpler, in that you could use a small jet engine should you wish. If an intermediate solution were required, you could propose that she follow the Buffy the Vampire playbook, and make like Dracula (lid down option). However, either of those may be more perilous than disagreeing with LJK Setright. Ferdinand ————————————— Found a bit. LJKS on how the proliferation of car safety equipment also threatens safety: https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/motoring/comment/ljk-setright-safety-features-can-be-downright-dangerous-486124.html

Shave a bit off the bedroom door and it will come in from the landing. Being an old house it may permeate through the gaps in the wall, the skirting, through the ceiling or the floor, or round the windows etc. F

Remember that eg Nuaire do a PIV unit designed for flats that goes through the wall, or various companies do single room Through The Ball units. But it is a stone cottage which makes it difficult and obvious outside, and you would perhaps want that out of the bedroom for noise rasons, and you do not want an HR unit in the ensuite because it gives a slightly cooler than room temperature draught when you and the boss are naked and dripping for which you would be held responsible. F

But you only need a marginal difference ? But running a larger dehumidifier on a timer during the day would leave you quiet at night. Or or you could fit a small dehumidifier and a small loft type heater - 20-40 ukp - heater which will make it work better. F

But that will only help if you have better ventilation in the en-suite, which helps the bedroom whilst not generating intrusive noise.

I wasn’t earning a vent .. I meant trim 8mm off the door.

Perhaps set with a timer to run during the day only, or with a built in humidistat (perhaps with *that* on a timer).

Do you have an en-suite? Could you put a quiet trickle fan ie fan With a background say 6l per second setting in there and either leave the door ajar or trim the bottom? Or trim 6-8mm off the bottom of the landing door and better ventilate that? Just trimming the doors migh help. Of your options 1 sounds the best.

I hope we keep this one open and take the police culture conversation somewhere else if we have it ... I have found this a very useful thread and still have a couple of substantive things to add, espially a reply to ST wrt bedroom statistics that I am still digging in to. F

I know that they had lots of problems a couple of years ago. Is it worth looking at yet, or is one committing to long, cold nights mending it or tending to engineers?

Had a chance to watch the whole programme whilst baking bread this afternoon. Recommend others watch and disagree if you do. My comments are harsh on the programme editorial: The landlords in the programme all seem absolutely fine. Long term business people investing in their houses, building up their businesses long term and providing a service to their customers that those customers want. All reputable, all straight and all competent, significantly taking on projects the Councils would not tackle. A couple of criticisms can be made eg the 3x chap with the flash car, but they are relative fleabites. Will return to that. I would expect any competent long term risk-taking business person to build a decent lifestyle over 10 years; my kitchen fitter has a replica Cobra in his garage for fun. Comments can be made around the issues of "one way bets" in the property market, and "tax breaks" and so on, and especially around Councils not being allowed to reinvest etc. I think that is the real target of the programme makers, but the fools decided to go the traditional shock horror individual landlord demonisation route instead of making a serious argument. Instead they put forward an editorial account that is half prejudice and half lies. And the environment businesses operates in is set by the framework created by government. IMO the most egregious lie was the one I pointed out - multiple references to the reduction in Council Home since 1980, juxtaposed with shock horror "some are now in the PRS", when in fact the vast majority of the fall in Council House numbers is down to stock transfers and houses now Owner Occupied. 800k are now in the PRS. 1.2 million are now Owner Occupied. 1.3 million are with Housing Associations. 0.5 million are with ALMOs - Arms Length Management Organisations. There was only one accurate mention afaics, about 30 minutes in. There were rather strange suggestions about "Investors snapping up council houses at bargain prices". A transaction between a willing buyer and a willing seller at an auction or via an Estate Agent is a market price not a "bargain". Even the signoff line was "But should investors be able to snap up ex-Council Houses at bargain proces". Again, stoking up prejudice. It is correct that there have been abuses - but this programme did not document any. The only slightly flash LL was a 32 year old who had built up a 25 property portfolio over 10 years - very much not get rich quick - and was shown with a flash car. But he was supplying inclusive bills rooms near central Manchester for under £100 a week, which is not gouging, for flexible tenancies for short term tenants. Not quite as savvy as he should be, because he mixed workers and students iirc. There was an attempt to do the "turning lounges into bedrooms cruel horrible bastard landlords" thing, but if you talk to those kind of tenants they usually don't want and don't use a lounge and like the lower rent. A big dining kitchen is far better. Interesting programme, but an editorial cesspit. There seemed to be a couple of Generation Rent activists on the team - not acknowledged in the titles. Ferdinand

There was me thinking that Willow Park was some sort of celebrity sproglet.

‘Some insulation in the loft’ .. does that mean it is difficult ie warm roof or so,etching else? And how much is some? In many places in the UK a trad cold loft can be insulated to 250mm rockwool for free. You can actually use an ASHP with radiators ... you just have to size them correctly for the lower temperature. if you did go that route it would probably replace your gas boiler when it dies, and I do not know if the insight helps but the last time I replaced a boiler I got a whole new set of rads and plumbing for only a few hundred more than the cost of a British Gas power flush of t existing rads. if you intend Underfloor insulation then there are ufh systems which simply go down as an 18mm layer over the top. That depends on your structure, however. Ferdinand

Static caravan parks usually have a "stay" limit from say March to October, and an age limit on caravans of about 10 years. Ferdinand