Future of P&J 17/3
Fenny
some long dormant memories from my exam days.
Firstly, selling off the land cheap to D&R seems to be one of those
things I remember as being dodgy according to tax laws. Isn't there
something called an "arms length transaction" to stop you flogging
assets to family members at below their true worth?
And then there's the £18k a year to live on. That's an awful lot for a
couple who don't have a mortgage. Surely, if they are still partners in
the farm, they will still draw from the business as before. If they
stop being partners, then D&R will have to buy them out of the business
completely. I agree that finding enough to service the loan and pay a
pension will be a big deal for a couple with 2+ kids before they start
to feed their own family.
I'm sure someone with more up to date knowledge can put me straight.
--
Fenny
In2home User
Fenny wrote in message dated 17/3
> And then there's the £18k a year to live on. That's an awful lot for a
> couple who don't have a mortgage.
I agree, being one of a couple in exactly this position - £18k/annum, we
should be so lucky. (But then I was only ever a teacher ....)
Of course P presumably has to run an expensive piano, the MOT on a
Bosendorfer must carry off a few quid.
I would like to raise a query about the sort of house which P+J are looking
for. As it happens we are looking for property in the general area of
Borsetshire (in Evesham actually, anyone got anything nice they want to
dispose of?)
We are at present living near York and prices here are not quite as high as
in Worcs, but even so the agents there are sending us des res below £100k.
Just what kind of a pad do P+J want to live in? Clearly after living in
splendid isolation in a vast farmhouse they couldn't be expected to cram
themselves into a terrace or even a semi-det, but detached houses ought to
be obtainable in Borsetshire for less than £200k surely? (I don't know,
because we can't afford anything much above £80k)
Mike Ruddock
A pedant in pedant's clothing
Andrew John Wineberg
> All these discussions of financing a future home for P&J have started
> some long dormant memories from my exam days.
Well IANAaccountant, so no such worries for me.
> Firstly, selling off the land cheap to D&R seems to be one of those
> things I remember as being dodgy according to tax laws. Isn't there
> something called an "arms length transaction" to stop you flogging
> assets to family members at below their true worth?
I don't know, but if (as I suspect is the case) they would be allowed to
trabsfer the ownership outright for no consideration, why should they
not be allowed to do so for 75% of the market value? There might be IHT
to consdier should Phil or Jill die within 7 years and, perhaps, the
transfer might be valued at market value for CGT purposes but it doesn't
sound very dodgy to me, especially since there is no intention to evade
or reduce tax liability as a result.
> And then there's the £18k a year to live on. That's an awful lot for a
> couple who don't have a mortgage.
That's what I thought. But then they aren't even considering any house
worth less than GBP 200,000 so perhaps they need all of that money to
pay their travel costs to and from Ambridge each day. Travel costs?
Well, at that price they must be buying something in central London,
surely?
--
AJW in Stanmore, Great Britain
http://www.whitewine.freeserve.co.uk/
Chris McMillan
> > couple who don't have a mortgage.
>
> in Worcs, but even so the agents there are sending us des res below £100k.
>
Which here will buy you a 2-bed Victorian terrace with a view of the gas
works and the Reading - Waterloo line: probably built by my uncle's great
grandfather. (He's married to my dad's eldest sister). I was told that
price by a friend who's about to leave the area as he can't (as a single
bloke) afford to live here: and another young married friend has recently
moved to Fenny's neck of the woods for the same reason. Dread to think how
far away our Nut will have to go!
Sincerely, Chris
--
Mrs. Chris McMillan. Tel. 0118 926 5450. e-mail:
ch...@mikesounds.demon.co.uk http://www.mikesounds.demon.co.uk/
George Middleton
>Dread to think how
>far away our Nut will have to go!
You mean that you and Mike are not going to move out and give her your
house?
--
George
George Middleton
>And then there's the £18k a year to live on. That's an awful lot for a
>couple who don't have a mortgage.
It's a pitiful pension for a couple who have built up a business worth
1.5 million in land plus three houses, farm buildings, equipment and
livestock.
--
George
Stephen GC Tilley
You make it sound as if they started at zero - which is far from the
truth.
--
S t e p h e n T i l l e y - Til...@UKOnline.co.UK
operates in the present
- a dangerous interface between the past and a future.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
badriya
<A.Win...@Whitewine.Freeserve.co.UK> wrote:
>> And then there's the £18k a year to live on. That's an awful lot for a
>> couple who don't have a mortgage.
>
>That's what I thought. But then they aren't even considering any house
>worth less than GBP 200,000 so perhaps they need all of that money to
>pay their travel costs to and from Ambridge each day. Travel costs?
>Well, at that price they must be buying something in central London,
>surely?
I thought 200k is outrageous. They really could live in one of the
cottages they already have and spend 10k making it how they want it.
Vicky
--
Late at night, somewhat tight, guardian angel's put to flight
Freddy's doused the neon light that promised while it shone.
Time to go, time to blow, they don't push me cos they know
I'm still in my long ago, when Annie took me home.
George Middleton
>> It's a pitiful pension for a couple who have built up a business worth
>> 1.5 million in land plus three houses, farm buildings, equipment and
>> livestock.
>> --
>> George
>
>You make it sound as if they started at zero - which is far from the
>truth.
closely into the origin of that wealth.
But when I said "built up" I meant it. Compare with the Grundys, who
have "run down".
--
George
Fenny
Ch...@mikesounds.demon.co.uk says...
> In article <953374015.18872...@news.in2home.co.uk>, In2home User
> <URL:mailto:us...@stanleyville.in2home.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > Fenny wrote in message dated 17/3
> >
> > > couple who don't have a mortgage.
> >
>
> >
> Which here will buy you a 2-bed Victorian terrace with a view of the gas
> works and the Reading - Waterloo line: probably built by my uncle's great
> grandfather. (He's married to my dad's eldest sister). I was told that
> price by a friend who's about to leave the area as he can't (as a single
> bloke) afford to live here: and another young married friend has recently
> far away our Nut will have to go!
>
would have paid about 50% more for this house in either Huddersfield or
Sheffield.
--
Fenny
Fenny
says...
> Fenny wrote>
> >And then there's the £18k a year to live on. That's an awful lot for a
> >couple who don't have a mortgage.
>
> 1.5 million in land plus three houses, farm buildings, equipment and
> livestock.
>
it. I bet they never "paid" for the milk quota when they were invented,
they just own the asset now that a value has been attached to it.
--
Fenny
Fenny
bad...@void.demon.co.uk says...
> I thought 200k is outrageous. They really could live in one of the
> cottages they already have and spend 10k making it how they want it.
>
cottage. And they's have Jason hanging around eating them out of house
& home.
--
Fenny
Linda Fox
>
> probably built by my uncle's great
> grandfather. (He's married to my dad's eldest sister).
So what relation does that make you to yourself?
Linda Ff
Robin Fairbairns
>Stephen GC Tilley wrote>
>>[george makes] it sound as if they started at zero - which is far
>>from the truth.
>
>When it comes to the ownership of wealth, it doesn't do to look too
>closely into the origin of that wealth.
maybe so,
>But when I said "built up" I meant it. Compare with the Grundys, who
>have "run down".
the grundies (in those terms) started with cr*p rented land, built up
a not very successful farm, lost pretty much everything rather
recently in a fire, and seemed to be on their way to building it up
again when their miscalculation hit them. phil was a lot luckier than
many -- the people who *are* impressive are pat'n'tony, who are making
a real go of a business on rented land. (btw, are they the only
remaining tenants of bland?)
--
Robin Fairbairns, Cambridge
btms
<ne...@rickmansworth.invalid.co.uk> leans upon the bar of Bull, draws in
their breath and says:
>> It's a pitiful pension for a couple who have built up a business worth
>> 1.5 million in land plus three houses, farm buildings, equipment and
>> livestock.
>>
>But they didn't build it up, they inherited most of it,
Hmmm. Having spent my early years working for a bank where the
customers were largely farmers - I would suggest that what they inherited
was a large overdraft and a mortgage.
--
btms
Helen Johns
In2home User <us...@stanleyville.in2home.co.uk> wrote in message
news:953374015.18872...@news.in2home.co.uk...
>
> I would like to raise a query about the sort of house which P+J are
looking
> for. As it happens we are looking for property in the general area
of
> Borsetshire (in Evesham actually, anyone got anything nice they want
to
> dispose of?)
A very wise choice, IMHO. Hope you will be very happy there. I was
born and brought up in Evesham. I haven't lived in _that_ many other
places, but none have been nicer than the old home town. I would move
back there tomorrow if I were to retire/win the lottery/find a
suitable teleworking career.
>
> We are at present living near York and prices here are not quite as
high as
> in Worcs, but even so the agents there are sending us des res below
£100k.
> Just what kind of a pad do P+J want to live in? Clearly after living
in
> splendid isolation in a vast farmhouse they couldn't be expected to
cram
> themselves into a terrace or even a semi-det, but detached houses
ought to
> be obtainable in Borsetshire for less than £200k surely? (I don't
know,
> because we can't afford anything much above £80k)
Assuming Borsetshire is, as you imply, not very far from
Worcestershire, I would say that Phil'n'Jill could set themselves up
very nicely for less than 200k squids somewhere in the area. The
problem is that they seem set on remaining in Ambridge. It is not that
big a village, so Jill would know most of the properties. Lots would
be ruled out by size and location (she didn't want to live right on
the road) so there would be a comparatively small number of detached
houses or bungalows, with sufficient accomodation (as they perceive
it) in the right location, with a big enough garden. They could have
to wait *ages* for the right place to come on the market. D+R might
have to wait a while.
--
Helen Johns
Salisbury
Chris McMillan
<URL:mailto:gzo...@cableinet.co.uk> wrote:
> Chris McMillan wrote>
> >Dread to think how
> >far away our Nut will have to go!
>
> house?
She's offering us a tent in the back garden - chances are toodles as owner
of the much coveted studio would be allowed squatters rights inside though
-;) (Talk about having one's future mapped out: that girl knows where she's
going).
Gill Spaul
Fenny <ne...@rickmansworth.invalid.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.133c97134...@news.lineone.net...
> All these discussions of financing a future home for P&J have started
> some long dormant memories from my exam days.
>
> things I remember as being dodgy according to tax laws. Isn't there
> something called an "arms length transaction" to stop you flogging
> assets to family members at below their true worth?
I think the accountant suggested selling at the bottom of the acceptable
range which might get round this. There are also dofferent tax laws for
agricultural land & property anyway (these have recently changed IIRC) so
the whole issue may not arise.
>
> And then there's the £18k a year to live on. That's an awful lot for a
> couple who don't have a mortgage. Surely, if they are still partners in
> the farm, they will still draw from the business as before. If they
> stop being partners, then D&R will have to buy them out of the business
> completely. I agree that finding enough to service the loan and pay a
> pension will be a big deal for a couple with 2+ kids before they start
> to feed their own family.
Did we ever decide if Ambridge farmers was a partnership or a limited
company? If a partnership, then the amount they take out should be related
pretty damn closely to the state of their capital account, and the
partnership agreement should dictate how much can be taken (and over what
period) anyway. If a limited company, then they can draw what they want I
suppose, as long as the net assets etc can stand it - but it does seem
rather strange to me. The accountant they spoke to seemed to think he was
*their* accountant rather than the partnership/company accountant. The
interests no longer coincide and D&R should get advice quickly before Jill
fleeces them blind.
>
> I'm sure someone with more up to date knowledge can put me straight.
gill
Penny Mayes
>
>Assuming Borsetshire is, as you imply, not very far from
>Worcestershire, I would say that Phil'n'Jill could set themselves up
>very nicely for less than 200k squids somewhere in the area. The
>problem is that they seem set on remaining in Ambridge. It is not that
>big a village, so Jill would know most of the properties. Lots would
>be ruled out by size and location (she didn't want to live right on
>the road) so there would be a comparatively small number of detached
>houses or bungalows, with sufficient accomodation (as they perceive
>it) in the right location, with a big enough garden. They could have
>to wait *ages* for the right place to come on the market. D+R might
>have to wait a while.
Looking at the various maps there seem to be loads of redundant farmhouses
in the area. I didn't think it was very clear whether they intended to stay
in the village. Could it be that Norman Painting and June Spencer are
considering retirement?
Penny
Don't bother me. I'm living happily ever after.
umra Nicknames & Abbreviations http://www.bigwig.net/umra/nicks.html
Brenda Selwyn
>On Sat, 18 Mar 2000 16:14:28 GMT, Andrew John Wineberg
><A.Win...@Whitewine.Freeserve.co.UK> wrote:
>
>>> And then there's the £18k a year to live on. That's an awful lot for a
>>> couple who don't have a mortgage.
>>
>>That's what I thought. But then they aren't even considering any house
>>worth less than GBP 200,000 so perhaps they need all of that money to
>>pay their travel costs to and from Ambridge each day. Travel costs?
>>Well, at that price they must be buying something in central London,
>>surely?
Surely 200K wouldn't buy a 1-bed flat in Central London?
I managed to miss both Friday's epi and the omni (2nd time this
year:-( and Chris hasn't published his summary yet, so I don't know
what sort of property their looking for. However, assuming the house
prices in South Borsetshire are similar to here (not totally
unreasonable IMHO), they probably won't find an old, picturesque,
3-bed cottage in reasonable condition for less than 140K. 4-beds and
you're looking at around 180K. A 2-bed cottage near here sold
recently for 105K.
>I thought 200k is outrageous. They really could live in one of the
>cottages they already have and spend 10k making it how they want it.
However, whether they should be looking for such an expensive property
at all is a moot point - I can see both sides of the argument
unfortunately.
Brenda
--
***************************************************************
Brenda M Selwyn
Nr Bath, North East Somerset
bre...@matson.demon.co.uk
http://www.matson.demon.co.uk/brenda.htm
Brenda Selwyn
>many -- the people who *are* impressive are pat'n'tony, who are making
>a real go of a business on rented land. (btw, are they the only
>remaining tenants of bland?)
AIUI, Yes.
George Middleton
>>But when I said "built up" I meant it. Compare with the Grundys, who
>>have "run down".
>
>the grundies (in those terms) started with cr*p rented land, built up
>a not very successful farm, lost pretty much everything rather
>recently in a fire, and seemed to be on their way to building it up
>again when their miscalculation hit them.
Some miscalculation. The bill-paying ability of a sock drawer.
--
George
George Middleton
>> It's a pitiful pension for a couple who have built up a business worth
>> 1.5 million in land plus three houses, farm buildings, equipment and
>> livestock.
>>
>it. I bet they never "paid" for the milk quota when they were invented,
>they just own the asset now that a value has been attached to it.
I know, but there is no rule that says that says that people who own an
asset valued at 2 million or so should live as if they didn't. Were it
so, there would be no point in the National Lottery.
--
George
George Middleton
re
>
>customers were largely farmers - I would suggest that what they inherited
>was a large overdraft and a mortgage.
And the land and property so valuable that astute bankers were prepared
to lend them money on the strength of it.
--
George
btms
<gzo...@cableinet.co.uk> leans upon the bar of Bull, draws in their breath
and says:
>And the land and property so valuable that astute bankers were prepared
>to lend them money on the strength of it.
Yes and collect so much commission and charges etc., that what was left
for the farmer who actually did the work, was often derisory.
--
btms
Stephen GC Tilley
r...@cl.cam.ac.uk wrote:
> George Middleton <gzo...@cableinet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> the grundies (in those terms) started with cr*p rented land, built up
> a not very successful farm, lost pretty much everything rather
> recently in a fire, and seemed to be on their way to building it up
> a real go of a business on rented land. (btw, are they the only
> remaining tenants of bland?)
> Robin Fairbairns, Cambridge
That's a very good summary. When you have no financial cushion to fall
back on one mistake can ruin you, yet paradoxically it causes you to
take risks like Eddie did with the 'on approval' farm equipment to try
to trade yourself out of an under-capitalised rut.
Brian's tears over the Grundys are somewhat crocodilian when one
considers it's his rapacity as a landlord that has been a major
contribution to them being insufficiently capitalised for all these
years. As soon as they start trading at a sufficient surplus to allow
then to build up capital reserves he hikes up their rent.
A RealWorld dairy farmer obeserved on R4 on Saturday morning that
despite the collapsing milk prices her rent had doubled in the last 4
years.
C.J. Wallace
>
> Fenny wrote>
> >And then there's the £18k a year to live on. That's an awful lot for a
> >couple who don't have a mortgage.
>
> 1.5 million in land plus three houses, farm buildings, equipment and
> livestock.
You see, George, I see your point.
But I also wonder about the justice of the thing.
Currently, both the older and the younger generation are working the
farm. And both get an income from it.
Now, Phil and Jill are planning to retire. They have made no provision
whatsoever for their retirement - no savings, nothing. It seems to me
that their plans risk leaving David and Ruth in financial difficulty.
David and Ruth have worked hard on the farm and don't deserve that. For
Phil and Jill to take that much more out of the current assets of the
farm would make life even more difficult for David and Ruth.
And the house belongs to the farm. It only belongs to Phil and Jill
insofar as they run the farm. If they decide to retire, it seems right
that they should move out of the house. That's what you get if you live
in a house which is attached to your job - clergy, members of the armed
forces, people who live above the shop, people in domestic service, are
all in the same position.
Chloe
George Middleton
>David and Ruth have worked hard on the farm and don't deserve that. For
>Phil and Jill to take that much more out of the current assets of the
>farm would make life even more difficult for David and Ruth.
Well, as Rosie reminded us a few weeks ago, Papa may have and Momma may
have but God bless the child who's got his own.
And *does* a modern farmer need to live on the farm? The call centre
where I while away my evenings operates 24 hours per day but the
Caretaker (of course he has a much fancier title than that) lives 40
miles away in Leeds.
--
George
chris harrison
>
> >bad...@void.demon.co.uk (badriya) wrote:
>
> >On Sat, 18 Mar 2000 16:14:28 GMT, Andrew John Wineberg
> >
> >>> And then there's the £18k a year to live on. That's an awful lot for a
> >>> couple who don't have a mortgage.
> >>
> >>worth less than GBP 200,000 so perhaps they need all of that money to
> >>pay their travel costs to and from Ambridge each day. Travel costs?
> >>Well, at that price they must be buying something in central London,
> >>surely?
>
> Surely 200K wouldn't buy a 1-bed flat in Central London?
Depends what you mean by central (0207, zone 1, circle line, south/north
circular, EC/WC & *1 postcodes etc.) but there are bits where 200k would
buy you a 1-bed with change, widen it to zone 2 and you're set.
> I managed to miss both Friday's epi and the omni (2nd time this
> year:-( and Chris hasn't published his summary yet, so I don't know
> what sort of property their looking for.
Chris didn't hear Friday's until about 11am this morning, but has since
published the summary :) Tends to be the way of the world, Sunday's
being almost my busiest day of the week ....
--
"Service. 1. n. Bug fix, as in `Service Pack'.
2. v.t. Impregnation, as in `the stallion serviced the mare.'"
chris harrison - http://www.lowfield.co.uk/
Stephen GC Tilley
> Now, Phil and Jill are planning to retire. They have made no provision
> whatsoever for their retirement - no savings, nothing. It seems to me
> that their plans risk leaving David and Ruth in financial difficulty.
> David and Ruth have worked hard on the farm and don't deserve that.
< S N I P >
>
> Chloe
Oddly enough this is one of the reasons Ambridge Farmers Ltd was set up
all those years ago. Its purpose was, amongst others, to provide an
income for Dan'n'Doris while ensuring that Phil'n'Jill took over
smoothly and were rewarded for their efforts.
It was this point about the ownership and occupation of Brookfield that
caused me to find this ng last year to confirm my remembrance.
It's also why I coined CABS to explain what had happened.
--
S t e p h e n T i l l e y - Til...@UKOnline.co.UK
operates in the present
NB 'amongst others' instead of 'inter alia'
Mike Ellwood
: Now, Phil and Jill are planning to retire. They have made no provision
: whatsoever for their retirement - no savings, nothing. It seems to me
That may be true now, but was there not talk of investments before?
Did they dispose of thse in order to give money to Kenton?
There was a recent comment that Kenton had already had his inheritence
(in order to finance his boat business, wasn't it?). It seems unlike
the prudent Phil and Jill not to have _any_ savings or investment left,
even after bailing out the black sheep of the family.
: that their plans risk leaving David and Ruth in financial difficulty.
: David and Ruth have worked hard on the farm and don't deserve that. For
: Phil and Jill to take that much more out of the current assets of the
: farm would make life even more difficult for David and Ruth.
: And the house belongs to the farm. It only belongs to Phil and Jill
: insofar as they run the farm. If they decide to retire, it seems right
: that they should move out of the house. That's what you get if you live
: in a house which is attached to your job - clergy, members of the armed
: forces, people who live above the shop, people in domestic service, are
: all in the same position.
Agreed, although they are still partners. It's not just a "job".
P&J definitely deserve a "pension". It just seems silly for D&R
to be having to pay interest to a bank in order to provide it.
This is the price of their inheritence, I guess, but what if _their_
farm becomes unviable one day....?
--
Mike.E...@rl.ac.uk
Robin Fairbairns
>And *does* a modern farmer need to live on the farm?
i would presume so, unless all the farm work is done by other (paid)
staff.
>The call centre
>where I while away my evenings operates 24 hours per day but the
>Caretaker (of course he has a much fancier title than that) lives 40
>miles away in Leeds.
it depends what you mean by caretaker. someone who sweeps up, empties
dustbins and things sounds a bit unlikely to be resident 40 miles away
-- it's the sort of job you fill locally at a derisory wage. if you
mean a person who takes care of the place, remotely pulling strings to
make you all jump as necessary, then there's obviously no need for him
to be on the spot.
but such a person _couldn't_ reasonably be expected to be there for
milking at 0600 every day, surely?
--
Robin Fairbairns, Cambridge
Marjorie Clarke
Brenda Selwyn <bre...@matson.demon.co.uk> wrote
> However, whether they should be looking for such an expensive property
> at all is a moot point - I can see both sides of the argument
> unfortunately.
Yes, I can't see why they need to spend so much. From what we know about
their lifestyle, they need would like a large kitchen with a HUGE aga, and a
living room with space for a piano, but nothing special apart from that.
What they don't seem to need (as the rest of us do) is spare rooms for
people to come and stay, as all their family live around them, except the
exiled Kenton. £200K seems a lot for these requirements.
Considering that they are asking Ruth and David to borrow money to help them
buy this house, and to provide an income for them, I'd have thought they
could downsize a bit.
I suppose this shows why they so rarely mention prices of anything in soaps
(or of course FOTW documentaries) - any sum you mention will be questioned
by listeners. And I'm questioning this one.
And it's not at all clear to me how David and Ruth are supposed to find the
money to pay back the huge loan that they're being asked to take on. Not so
long ago the farm was struggling and they were all tightening their belts
and restricting their allowances, and now there seems to be an assumption
that the farm is generating huge profits. Have I missed something?
--
Marjorie Clarke
Min Lacey
<LAW...@leeds.ac.uk> used the electronic medium to say....
>>
>> It's a pitiful pension for a couple who have built up a business worth
>> 1.5 million in land plus three houses, farm buildings, equipment and
>> livestock.
>
>You see, George, I see your point.
>But I also wonder about the justice of the thing.
>Currently, both the older and the younger generation are working the
>farm. And both get an income from it.
>whatsoever for their retirement - no savings, nothing. It seems to me
noone has actually said what the consequences would be if R&D _couldn't_
keep up the payments - surely they'd risk everything?
I'm sure that somerat will know, though.....
--
Min
umra BT Sex Award winner 1999
May your Scottish pony perish while doing a quick foxtrot
Andrew John Wineberg
> And *does* a modern farmer need to live on the farm?
I'd guess so, considering the long and irregular hours that farmers
often seem to work. Even in his day and age, cows still need to be
milked at about 6.30 a.m. and rolling out of bed in time for this is
surely difficult enough without having to commute for twenty minutes or
half an hour first.
--
AJW in Stanmore, Great Britain
http://www.whitewine.freeserve.co.uk/
Andrew Stevenson
Fenny wrote ...
> And then there's the £18k a year to live on. That's an awful lot for a
> the farm, they will still draw from the business as before. If they
> stop being partners, then D&R will have to buy them out of the business
> completely. I agree that finding enough to service the loan and pay a
> pension will be a big deal for a couple with 2+ kids before they start
> to feed their own family.
18 grand does seem to give them a very comfortable standard of living, given
that they'll not have a mortgage (and many pensioners, not to mention
working and unemployed people would find it very comfortable even with a
mortgage, I feel).
I found it very strange that D&R didn't react negatively to the suggestion,
or at least ask P&J what was wrong with the bungalow/Woodbine Cottage. Were
D&R really in such a state of shock that they couldn't think straight?
Can anyone remember what the bungalow was built for? Although R&D became
the first occupants, I've always had in the back of my mind that it was
built with P&J's retirement in mind.
I'm staggered by the cost of houses in Borsetshire too. 200 grand? What do
P&J want - some kind of mansion? Just how big a house do they need? (And
why hasn't David asked that question?). Why don't they build an extension
to the bungalow, and annexe a bit more farmland for the garden? (and send
Bert back to Woodbine Cottage of course).
--
Andrew
Dull website at: http://www.lancs.ac.uk/staff/exaajs/
Fenny
> I didn't think it was very clear whether they intended to stay
> in the village. Could it be that Norman Painting and June Spencer are
> considering retirement?
>
>
>
--
Fenny
Fenny
bre...@matson.demon.co.uk says...
> Surely 200K wouldn't buy a 1-bed flat in Central London?
>
currently living in is going for. But then, I suppose you'd have to add
the cost of an annual travel card to get to central London.
--
Fenny
Fenny
> And the house belongs to the farm. It only belongs to Phil and Jill
> insofar as they run the farm. If they decide to retire, it seems right
> that they should move out of the house. That's what you get if you live
> in a house which is attached to your job - clergy, members of the armed
> forces, people who live above the shop, people in domestic service, are
> all in the same position.
>
>
our parish in Sheffield. They rented it out to cover the mortgage, and
invested in it for the time when they would need to either sell it or
move into it when a house was no longer supplied by the job. I know
that he is now working in a commercial company, but don't know whether
they still have the house or have sold it, but at least they had made
the provision.
--
Fenny
Fenny
says...
> Something that I was very surprised at was that (unless done off-mike)
> noone has actually said what the consequences would be if R&D _couldn't_
> keep up the payments - surely they'd risk everything?
> I'm sure that somerat will know, though.....
>
other rat already said, why did P&J see *their* accountant. All seems
strange to me.
--
Fenny
Heather Knowles
<pen...@onet.co.yuk> writes
<snip>
>Could it be that Norman Painting and June Spencer are
>considering retirement?
No idea - but is Jill's alter ego moonlighting in that new BBC1
'Doctors' series starting next Monday lunchtime? I saw the trailer
today, and one of the patients looked and sounded awfully Jillish.
--
luv from the Strumpling Chucklet xxxxxxxxx
Fully paid-up member of HAHA
Mike McMillan
Andrew John Wineberg <URL:mailto:A.Win...@Whitewine.Freeserve.co.UK> wrote:
> On 20 Mar, George Middleton <gzo...@cableinet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > And *does* a modern farmer need to live on the farm?
>
> I'd guess so, considering the long and irregular hours that farmers
> often seem to work. Even in his day and age, cows still need to be
> milked at about 6.30 a.m. and rolling out of bed in time for this is
> surely difficult enough without having to commute for twenty minutes or
> half an hour first.
>
"C'mon Daisy, Gertrude, Rosie, Pamela, Penelope, Poppy - it's time you were
out of your beds, go on, push those duvets away - you've got a 30 minute
drive to the milking parlour ahead of you! ;-)))
Toodle Squirt,
Mike
--
Mike McMillan, Mike Sounds (Reading)
Digital Recording, Editing and CD Production: Tel: 0118 9265450,
Fax: 0118 9668167. http://www.mikesounds.demon.co.uk/
Fenny
A.Ste...@lancaster.ac.uk says...
> I found it very strange that D&R didn't react negatively to the suggestion,
> or at least ask P&J what was wrong with the bungalow/Woodbine Cottage. Were
> D&R really in such a state of shock that they couldn't think straight?
>
turn down both the bungalow & WC, then there is a house going spare. It
would seem more logical, if they sell one, to sell WC, as the Bungalow
is next to the farm. But can't see the point of leaving one standing
empty. So, unless they rent it to the Grundys for 17 grand a year to
pay the loan off, they should flog it and use the money to buy P&J
somewhere else.
--
Fenny
Robin Fairbairns
>And it's not at all clear to me how David and Ruth are supposed to find the
>money to pay back the huge loan that they're being asked to take on. Not so
>long ago the farm was struggling and they were all tightening their belts
>and restricting their allowances, and now there seems to be an assumption
>that the farm is generating huge profits. Have I missed something?
no, and i don't think david and ruth have, either. they really sound
as if they're unsure about whether they can keep such repayments
going, and if so, how they'll have to retrench to do achieve it.
--
Robin Fairbairns, Cambridge
Brenda Selwyn
>in the village. Could it be that Norman Painting and June Spencer are
>considering retirement?
Paddy Greene shirley? June Spencer plays Piggy (if only she _was_
considering retirement:-).
Brenda Selwyn
>Yes, I can't see why they need to spend so much. From what we know about
>their lifestyle, they need would like a large kitchen with a HUGE aga, and a
>living room with space for a piano, but nothing special apart from that.
>What they don't seem to need (as the rest of us do) is spare rooms for
>people to come and stay, as all their family live around them, except the
>exiled Kenton. £200K seems a lot for these requirements.
>Considering that they are asking Ruth and David to borrow money to help them
>buy this house, and to provide an income for them, I'd have thought they
>could downsize a bit.
On the one hand I can see the sense in this, but on the other I can
also see the counter argument; Phil & Jill have put their working
lifetime into building up the business (yes, I know it was in a pretty
good state when they inherited it) which they are now passing on to
David & Ruth, and the least they deserve for their retirement is to
live in a house they like.
As to whether they need all those rooms, well obviously they don't
_need_ them, but they probably wouldn't feel comfortable in a house
that small (or at least Jill wouldn't - I get the impression Phil
isn't so bothered). I can only state again the example of my in-laws.
When all their 5 children had left home they moved from a 7 bedroom to
a 3 bedroom house; less than a year later they were having a
two-storey, 1 bedroom extension built. They didn't really _need_ the
extra rooms (these days the bedroom is only used once in a blue moon);
the house just felt too small.
Can anyone remember what the logistic and financial arrangements were
when Dan handed over to Phil? I know Dan & Doris moved into Glebe
Cottage, which Doris already owned outright, but that's all I know.
BTW, re Agas and similar. We visited Chris's godmother and her
husband at the weekend and they have a 60 year old solid fuel Esse.
I'd never come across such a thing before.
Brenda Selwyn
>In article <38D621...@leeds.ac.uk>,
>LAW...@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
>> Now, Phil and Jill are planning to retire. They have made no provision
>> whatsoever for their retirement - no savings, nothing.
IIRC they gave all their savings to Kenton. Hence their comment that
he has already had his inheritance.
>Oddly enough this is one of the reasons Ambridge Farmers Ltd was set up
>all those years ago. Its purpose was, amongst others, to provide an
>income for Dan'n'Doris while ensuring that Phil'n'Jill took over
>smoothly and were rewarded for their efforts.
I e-mailed Keri Davies a few months ago about Ambridge Farmers Ltd and
he said he couldn't say anything as it was the subject of a future
plot line. I missed Friday's epi - did anyone mention AFL? I can't
recall having heard it mentioned otherwise.
Now I think back on it, it all looks a bit suspicious. When I first
mailed him, he said he didn't know and would need to ask Graham
Harvey. A few weeks later he mailed again and said it was the subject
of a future plot. Hmmm...
Brenda Selwyn
>
>I'm staggered by the cost of houses in Borsetshire too. 200 grand? What do
>P&J want - some kind of mansion?
No, probably just 4 bedrooms:-(
>Just how big a house do they need? (And
>why hasn't David asked that question?). Why don't they build an extension
>to the bungalow, and annexe a bit more farmland for the garden? (and send
>Bert back to Woodbine Cottage of course).
They don't like The Bungalow. However, "why don't they move into
Woodbine Cottage and have an extension built" is an alternative
question which could be asked. Unless planning permission might be a
problem. But I was forgetting, Jill doesn't want to live so close the
the main road. If she's going to be this fussy, their never going to
find anywhere.
Heather Knowles
<bre...@matson.demon.co.uk> writes
>>Stephen GC Tilley <til...@UKOnline.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>In article <38D621...@leeds.ac.uk>,
>>LAW...@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
>
>>> Now, Phil and Jill are planning to retire. They have made no provision
>>> whatsoever for their retirement - no savings, nothing.
>
>IIRC they gave all their savings to Kenton. Hence their comment that
>he has already had his inheritance.
But why.... (spoiler 20/3)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
....is Lizzie so angry? AFAIR, she has never contributed to the running
of the farm, and LL must be worth at least as much as Brookfield.
Shirley she didn't expect them to sell up and divvy up the proceeds??
Heather Knowles
>
>>
>>I'm staggered by the cost of houses in Borsetshire too. 200 grand? What do
>>P&J want - some kind of mansion?
>
>No, probably just 4 bedrooms:-(
Then they're living in the wrong part of the country. It only costs
about 65K for 4 bedrooms up here - ours is a detached 3 bedroom, and it
was on the market for 42K when we started renting.
Penny Mayes
>Reflecting on life over a pint of Shires, Penny Mayes
><pen...@onet.co.yuk> writes
><snip>
>>considering retirement?
>
>'Doctors' series starting next Monday lunchtime? I saw the trailer
>today, and one of the patients looked and sounded awfully Jillish.
I spotted that too, can an RT reader confirm?
Penny
Don't bother me. I'm living happily ever after.
umra Nicknames & Abbreviations http://www.bigwig.net/umra/nicks.html
btms
<A.Ste...@lancaster.ac.uk> leans upon the bar of Bull, draws in their
breath and says:
>'m staggered by the cost of houses in Borsetshire too. 200 grand? What do
>P&J want - some kind of mansion?
Crikey - where can you get a mansion for this money? My modest abode
with about 6 inches on either side of adjacent properties would furnish
plenty of change if swapped with something for 200K. By my reckoning I
was thinking P & J had in mind a well maintained but relatively ordinarily
sized house/cottage.
--
btms
Chris McMillan
> > >couple who don't have a mortgage.
> >
> > 1.5 million in land plus three houses, farm buildings, equipment and
> > livestock.
>
> You see, George, I see your point.
> But I also wonder about the justice of the thing.
>
Sincerely, Chris
--
Mrs. Chris McMillan. Tel. 0118 926 5450. e-mail:
ch...@mikesounds.demon.co.uk http://www.mikesounds.demon.co.uk/
Chris McMillan
<URL:mailto:marj...@theclarkes99.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Brenda Selwyn <bre...@matson.demon.co.uk> wrote
>
>
> And it's not at all clear to me how David and Ruth are supposed to find the
> money to pay back the huge loan that they're being asked to take on. Not so
> long ago the farm was struggling and they were all tightening their belts
> and restricting their allowances, and now there seems to be an assumption
> that the farm is generating huge profits. Have I missed something?
>
should go : Deavid says they should, Roof is not impressed - and is sticking
to her guns because of offering Neil the pigs job. Where does Hollowtree
come into this equation? Does Hollowtree still have a farmhouse?
Jeremy Fry
<chuc...@fanged.demon.co.uk> writes
>Reflecting on life over a pint of Shires, Brenda Selwyn
><bre...@matson.demon.co.uk> writes
>>>"Andrew Stevenson" <A.Ste...@lancaster.ac.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>P&J want - some kind of mansion?
>>
>
>Then they're living in the wrong part of the country. It only costs
>about 65K for 4 bedrooms up here - ours is a detached 3 bedroom, and it
>was on the market for 42K when we started renting.
>
At least they aren't here in Bucks., I live in one of eight two-
bedroomed maisonettes in two blocks conveniently placed for the railway
lines.
Two of them have gone on the market since Xmas, one for 95K, the other
for 93k(no double glazing). Both were sold in a fortnight. No wonder a
new member of staff at work was talking about lenders offering 4 times
salary.
--
Jeremy Fry
Stephen GC Tilley
Location, location, location.
You can live in the right house in the wrong area,
The wrong house in the wrong area,
The wrong house in the right area, or
The right house in the right area.
Odds are 3 to 1 against!
Wofe'n'I are already looking for properties for next move (scheduled
2004) and rediscovering truth of above.
--
S t e p h e n T i l l e y - Til...@UKOnline.co.UK
operates in the present
- a dangerous interface between the past and a future.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Rosie Mitchell
Farm Sale, I overheard Heather Knowles behind me saying to the bailiff:
>But why.... (spoiler 20/3)
[...]
>....is Lizzie so angry? AFAIR, she has never contributed to the running
>of the farm, and LL must be worth at least as much as Brookfield.
>Shirley she didn't expect them to sell up and divvy up the proceeds??
I think it goes deeper than mere property, it has a lot to do with how
loved, or otherwise, one feels by one's parents. Life has treated
Lizzie pretty kindly, on a superficial level, but she may feel abandoned
by her parents in favour of her older siblings.
I've often thought how awful Kenton must have felt, to have seen his
twin sister inherit her grandmother's house. And then to be taunted by
Shula's whining "But that was Gran's!" when he tried to acquire some
piece of furniture for Nelson's shop. But then I've never belonged to
that sort of family, so I wouldn't understand these things.
Rosie
--
Telephone 0117 941 3912
Mobile 0771 437 6391
Fax 0870 052 2054
ICQ 13609015
http://www.aida.demon.co.uk/rosie/
Currently reading: DEXTER, COLIN "The Daughters of Cain"
C.J. Wallace
>
> Reflecting on life over a pint of Shires, Brenda Selwyn
> <bre...@matson.demon.co.uk> writes
> of the farm, and LL must be worth at least as much as Brookfield.
> Shirley she didn't expect them to sell up and divvy up the proceeds??
Quite.
Speaking as someone who will probably inherit 2 pound 50 and a
ridiculously large number of books, seeing as how my parents (with any
luck) will spend all their money on a riotous retirement, I don't
understand why people get so het up about inheritances.
David and Ruth work on the farm. It's what they do. If they don't get
the farm, something is very, very unfair. Lizzie and Shula are getting
the house - that's 100 grand each, minus whatever tax they have to pay.
Whatever way you look at it, that's not doing bad at all.
Still, maybe all will become clear.
Chloe
Charles F Hankel
<Ch...@mikesounds.demon.co.uk> winced and said:
> In article <953374015.18872...@news.in2home.co.uk>, In2home User
> <URL:mailto:us...@stanleyville.in2home.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > Fenny wrote in message dated 17/3
> >
> > > And then there's the £18k a year to live on. That's an awful lot for a
> > > couple who don't have a mortgage.
> >
>
> > in Worcs, but even so the agents there are sending us des res below £100k.
> >
> Which here will buy you a 2-bed Victorian terrace with a view of the gas
> works and the Reading - Waterloo line: probably built by my uncle's great
> grandfather.
And round here will get you three or four terraced houses with some
change to spend on them and a couple of nice holidays. The rents on
the spare ones would keep your head above water financially.
--
Charles F Hankel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hapless FAQer on the Wirral peninsula
Member: Strombone 2000
Charles F Hankel
Even odder that they don't use the same accountant.
chris harrison
>
> Reflecting on life over a pint of Shires, Brenda Selwyn
> <bre...@matson.demon.co.uk> writes
> >he has already had his inheritance.
>
> But why.... (spoiler 20/3)
>
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
>
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
>
> ....is Lizzie so angry? AFAIR, she has never contributed to the running
> of the farm, and LL must be worth at least as much as Brookfield.
> Shirley she didn't expect them to sell up and divvy up the proceeds??
Perhaps she was hoping to be able to buy the farm? As a new land-owner
and farmer herself?
It's a fairly big deal and she's been presented with a fait accompli - I
think it would have been surprising if at least one of the kids had
disagreed and she would have been my favoured candidate. There's an
element of equality here, though. All other things being equal, you'd
expect the four of them to split the estate equally, but this would
blatantly not be the case.
She's "behind" Shula in some of these respects already - given that
Shula got Glebe Cottage from Doris - what did the other kids get?
--
"Service. 1. n. Bug fix, as in `Service Pack'.
2. v.t. Impregnation, as in `the stallion serviced the mare.'"
chris harrison - http://www.lowfield.co.uk/
Glynn & Kathy Greenwood
Heather Knowles <chuc...@fanged.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Reflecting on life over a pint of Shires, Brenda Selwyn
> <bre...@matson.demon.co.uk> writes
> >
> >>In article <38D621...@leeds.ac.uk>,
> >>LAW...@leeds.ac.uk wrote:
> >
> >>> Now, Phil and Jill are planning to retire. They have made no provision
> >>> whatsoever for their retirement - no savings, nothing.
> >
> >he has already had his inheritance.
No. I can remember Phil saying that they must keep sufficient savings.
Sufficient for what I dont know.
> But why.... (spoiler 20/3)
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> ....is Lizzie so angry? AFAIR, she has never contributed to the running
> of the farm, and LL must be worth at least as much as Brookfield.
> Shirley she didn't expect them to sell up and divvy up the proceeds??
The value of Lower Loxley Hall is besides the point. It has nothing to do
with Lizzie's inheritance.
--
Glynn Greenwood
In Stony Stratford, gateway to the mystical city of Milton Keynes
Glynn & Kathy Greenwood
200K. Now I may be a sugar confection but I thought the accountant said
that Brookfield farmhouse was worth 200K so that should be their limit
when buying another house.
Mike Ellwood
: the farm, something is very, very unfair. Lizzie and Shula are getting
: the house - that's 100 grand each, minus whatever tax they have to pay.
: Whatever way you look at it, that's not doing bad at all.
Especially as Shula is already Very Rich (Mark was busy trying
to find something to invest all their money in, and this was
before the life assurance would have paid up), married to
a professional man probably on a good income, and presumably
getting something non-trivial out of the horsy partnership.
Lizzie's position is probably slightly more precarious, as we don't
quite know the financial state of Lower Loxley, but if it pulls
through, she is also potentially going to be in a very comfortable
position.
--
Mike.E...@rl.ac.uk
Penny Mayes
>>"Penny Mayes" <pen...@onet.co.yuk> wrote:
>
>>in the village. Could it be that Norman Painting and June Spencer are
>>considering retirement?
>
>Paddy Greene shirley? June Spencer plays Piggy (if only she _was_
>considering retirement:-).
I didn't get where I am today by getting the facts right. You are, of
course, correct, the two ladies look somewhat similar and I couldn't
remember the right name so I flicked through the Beetle's book and stopped
at the wrong photo :(
Kate Lambert
<chuc...@fanged.demon.co.uk> writes
>
>No idea - but is Jill's alter ego moonlighting in that new BBC1
>'Doctors' series starting next Monday lunchtime? I saw the trailer
>today, and one of the patients looked and sounded awfully Jillish.
>
--
Kate Lambert
C.J. Wallace
>
> Several people seem to be saying that P&J are looking for a house worth
> 200K. Now I may be a sugar confection but I thought the accountant said
> that Brookfield farmhouse was worth 200K so that should be their limit
> when buying another house.
Maybe so - I can't remember
But they did tell someone (was it R and D, or Shula - I think it was on
Sunday) that they were looking at spending 200K. I remember distinctly
because I was eating at the time and choked on my noodles screeching
"200 grand!!!" at the top of my voice.
Chloe
George Middleton
>David and Ruth work on the farm. It's what they do. If they don't get
--
George
George Middleton
the various farmhouses and appurtenances that go with it.
--
George
C.J. Wallace
Oh, come on.
Not fair.
They are not employees. They are partners in the company that owns the
farm (or whatever), they take a full part in the decisions, and, if the
farm loses money, they lose out.
Where would be the justice in Lizzie, Shula, Kenton and David owning the
farm and sharing the profit, when David and Ruth do all the work to make
it viable? I know it's capitalism, but that doesn't make it fair.
Chloe
Stephen GC Tilley
This was the point I was trying to make ages ago. Phil'n'Jill did not
build the business up from zero. Nor did they buy it, if the current
story-line (ex AFL) is to be followed. So morally it's not theirs to
dispose of without taking into account the other direct descendants of
Dan'n'Doris.
If you inherit property the moral obligation is to pass it on.
George Middleton
>George Middleton wrote:
>>
>> C.J. Wallace wrote>
>> >David and Ruth work on the farm. It's what they do. If they don't get
>> >the farm, something is very, very unfair.
>> I am looking forward to the day when I inherit Next plc.
>
>Oh, come on.
>Not fair.
>They are not employees. They are partners in the company that owns the
>farm (or whatever), they take a full part in the decisions, and, if the
>farm loses money, they lose out.
And if Ventura Call Centre Management loses money They close it down and
I lose out.
>Where would be the justice in Lizzie, Shula, Kenton and David owning the
>farm and sharing the profit, when David and Ruth do all the work to make
>it viable?
They have had a job and a house. What more do they actually deserve
compared with their sibs and Bert?
>I know it's capitalism, but that doesn't make it fair.
I thought we were talking about fair.
>
>Chloe
I'm with Lizzy, I think.
--
George
There is no such thing as family. only society.
chris harrison
> This was the point I was trying to make ages ago. Phil'n'Jill did not
> build the business up from zero. Nor did they buy it, if the current
> story-line (ex AFL) is to be followed. So morally it's not theirs to
> dispose of without taking into account the other direct descendants of
> Dan'n'Doris.
What's Chris' stake in the farm? When D&D died I presume Phil was
"given" the farm because he was taking it on from his father, so
Christine, while "given" the Stables wasn't involved in the farm, so
didn't "benefit" through the inheritance.
This, ISTM, is being reflected in David (and Ruth, benefitted as Jill
did before her) taking on the farm from his father, but his siblings
received "their due" in other ways.
Kate Lambert
<gzo...@cableinet.co.uk> writes
>
>And *does* a modern farmer need to live on the farm?
Yes. It's not so much the morning milking (at my parents' this is taken
in turn by dad on the spot, sister 10 minutes down the road and employee
who has a half-hour drive) but more all the things that can happen in
the night - cows calving, cows getting out and wandering onto the
roundabouts of Basildon, foxes attacking the chickens, haystacks
catching fire, the police wanting to search your buildings for stolen
chainsaws that kind of thing.
When my grandfather died in 1970 my father instantly moved back to the
farmhouse from the cottage so that he'd be there overnight. In the end
mum gave up living on her own in the cottage (well I was with her but
only 2 at the time) and joined dad and grandmother in the farmhouse
"temporarily" to put up with 13 years of "we don't cook potatoes like
that in this house, dear" (as I think I've said before).
--
Kate Lambert
Brenda Selwyn
>Reflecting on life over a pint of Shires, Brenda Selwyn
><bre...@matson.demon.co.uk> writes
>>>"Andrew Stevenson" <A.Ste...@lancaster.ac.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>I'm staggered by the cost of houses in Borsetshire too. 200 grand? What do
>>>P&J want - some kind of mansion?
>>
>>No, probably just 4 bedrooms:-(
>
>Then they're living in the wrong part of the country. It only costs
>about 65K for 4 bedrooms up here - ours is a detached 3 bedroom, and it
>was on the market for 42K when we started renting.
However, the commuting costs to Ambridge to babysit Pip & Josh & No3
could be a bit prohibitive:-)
I was in Bath this morning so I had a look in a couple of estate
agents, and as I suspected 4-bed house in a "sought after" village, in
good nick and with a reasonable garden is about 180K. Prices in South
Borsetshire must be similar. Let's sidestep the "do they really need
4 bedrooms" argument for the moment.
One thing we haven't mentioned is the garden size - they may be
looking for quite a large one. Jill may be planning to keep chickens
again, and what about the bees (or did she give them up; I can't
remember)? Phil might even want to take his favourite pigs. Which
brings me to Glebe Cottage...
The Big Book says that Glebe Cottage has 4 acres of land. I must say
it's not obvious from the "aeriel view" map where that land is; the
garden appears large, but not that large. However, it's another
feature which might appeal to P&J. Though if they rent or buy from
Shula, it may complicate matters even further (can't say more, Monday
spoiler!).
If it's P&J to Glebe Cottage, I'm still favouring StS&A to the Grange
Farm house. However, another possibility has occurred to me. What
about the Dower House? I know it was Caroline's home with Guy, but
it's some time now since he died and one might think she might be
rattling around a bit in there by herself (from the picture in the
booklet attached to the map it appears to have about 6 bedrooms). But
then Caroline to where?
Brenda
--
***************************************************************
Brenda M Selwyn
Nr Bath, North East Somerset
bre...@matson.demon.co.uk
http://www.matson.demon.co.uk/brenda.htm
Brenda Selwyn
>....is Lizzie so angry? AFAIR, she has never contributed to the running
>of the farm, and LL must be worth at least as much as Brookfield.
>Shirley she didn't expect them to sell up and divvy up the proceeds??
Of course not, that would be silly:-) She probably expects David to
buy the other three out. Having only known her in recent years, I
tend to forget how horrible Elizabeth can be. Just occasionally she
reverts to type. Hence I never expected her to react in this way.
This is one of the rare occasions where Shula has come out looking
good.
Does she have a point though (hint, no)? On the face of it the
division doesn't seem very fair - David gets land worth 1.5 million,
Shula & Lizzie each get half of a 200K house and Kenton gets a lump
sum. But surely Lizzie knows she can trust her parents to be as fair
as possible to all their offspring. David & Ruth have put a lot into
the farm and they are being asked to borrow heavily to support their
parents retirement and effectively to finance Shula & Lizzie's
inheritance. Unless house prices plummet Lizzie stands to make at
least 100K, for which most people would be damn grateful. ISTM if
anyone will be hard done by it'll be Kenton. IIRC P&J's savings only
amounted to a few thousand, though I suppose you do have to take into
account the interest that will earn over the years, him having had it
in advance. He seems to be happy anyway.
However, I do feel the value of Lower Loxley is irrelevant. IMHO
treating one's children differently from one another just because some
are better off than others is unfair and likely to lead to trouble.
Lizzie might take it as an instructive example though. When Gerald
died, Nigel got the house. What did Camilla get? Probably less than
its value, but then she didn't get the costs of its upkeep either.
BTW, the continuity announcer was great again last night "You do have
to sympathise with Elizabeth, she does have two offspring and a
stately home to support after all":-)
Mark Bluemel
Brenda Selwyn wrote in message ...
>about the Dower House? I know it was Caroline's home with Guy, but
>it's some time now since he died and one might think she might be
>rattling around a bit in there by herself (from the picture in the
>booklet attached to the map it appears to have about 6 bedrooms). But
>then Caroline to where?
Hasn't she already left Ambridge? Taking Usha with her.
Glynn & Kathy Greenwood
Glynn & Kathy Greenwood <gw...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> Several people seem to be saying that P&J are looking for a house worth
> 200K. Now I may be a sugar confection but I thought the accountant said
> that Brookfield farmhouse was worth 200K so that should be their limit
> when buying another house.
I think I will be forgiven for replying to my own post since I have to
brush the sugar off and admit I was wrong. Phil definately said he
expected to spend 200K on a house.
Marjorie Clarke
Penny Mayes <pen...@onet.co.yuk> wrote
>
> I didn't get where I am today by getting the facts right. You are, of
> course, correct, the two ladies look somewhat similar.....
That's what comes of looking in books. They look quite different from each
other on the radio.
--
Marjorie Clarke
Marjorie Clarke
Fenny <ne...@rickmansworth.invalid.co.uk> wrote
> I know they say they don't want to break up the farm assets, but if P&J
> turn down both the bungalow & WC, then there is a house going spare. It
> would seem more logical, if they sell one, to sell WC, as the Bungalow
> is next to the farm. But can't see the point of leaving one standing
> empty. So, unless they rent it to the Grundys for 17 grand a year to
> pay the loan off, they should flog it and use the money to buy P&J
> somewhere else.
That's a very good point. What on earth was the point of building the
bungalow if they're all too grand to live in it? I hope Ruth and David have
the sense to suggest that the bungalow could be sold or rented out to offset
the cost of P& J's new house.
--
Marjorie Clarke
In2home User
Penny Mayes in a posting on 20/3 wrote (some snipping done here)
> ><pen...@onet.co.yuk> writes
> ><snip>
> >>Could it be that Norman Painting and June Spencer are
> >>considering retirement?
> >
> >'Doctors' series starting next Monday lunchtime? I saw the trailer
> >today, and one of the patients looked and sounded awfully Jillish.
>
>
> Penny
Yes it is "Jill": according to next week's RT Patricia Greene is playing a
part in "Doctors". (Cast list is printed on the Sunday evening page.)
Mike Ruddock
A pedant in pedant's clothing.
Min Lacey
<gzo...@cableinet.co.uk> used the electronic medium to say....
>C.J. Wallace wrote>
>>David and Ruth work on the farm. It's what they do. If they don't get
>>the farm, something is very, very unfair.
>I am looking forward to the day when I inherit Next plc.
:-)
--
Min
umra BT Sex Award winner 1999
May your Scottish pony perish while doing a quick foxtrot
Min Lacey
All this reminds me of the Lord Peter Winsey story when Harriet was
trying to explain to a particularly PC visitor why their sons were
treated differently...(from memory)
H: Well, Bredon's going to inherit as the eldest..
PCV: I always think the French system, where the property is divided
between the children equally is so much better for the children
H: Maybe, but not for the property
PCV: Surely Peter wouldn't favour his property above his children?
H: (Laughing) Peter's a middle-aged man and he's reverting rapidly to
type......
Chris McMillan
<URL:mailto:Ref...@reflect.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <8b62rp$3t0$1...@sponge.lancs.ac.uk>, Andrew Stevenson
> <A.Ste...@lancaster.ac.uk> leans upon the bar of Bull, draws in their
> breath and says:
> >'m staggered by the cost of houses in Borsetshire too. 200 grand? What do
> >P&J want - some kind of mansion?
>
Sincerely, Chris
--
Mrs. Chris McMillan. Tel. 0118 926 5450. e-mail:
ch...@mikesounds.demon.co.uk http://www.mikesounds.demon.co.uk/
Chris McMillan
<URL:mailto:bre...@matson.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >"Andrew Stevenson" <A.Ste...@lancaster.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> >
> They don't like The Bungalow. However, "why don't they move into
> Woodbine Cottage and have an extension built" is an alternative
> question which could be asked. Unless planning permission might be a
> problem. But I was forgetting, Jill doesn't want to live so close the
> the main road. If she's going to be this fussy, their never going to
> find anywhere.
>
I can go with Jill not wanting to live on a main road after being in a
farmhouse. I have one aunt and uncle who have spent, I would think, about
45 out of their 50 years in a tiny (2 up/3 down - my uncle built a tiny
extension to get that) cottage right out in the country. There's an
adjoining cottage attached to them, plus a matching pair a field away - and
round the bend a pub (which is now shut). That is the extent of their
neighbours for about a mile in each direction. No way will they be able to
live there if they become disabled - you couldn't get a wheelchair *in* the
living room. Moving into the nearest village would be counted as noisy to
them!
Chris McMillan
<URL:mailto:r...@betsy.cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
> Marjorie Clarke <marj...@theclarkes99.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> no, and i don't think david and ruth have, either. they really sound
> as if they're unsure about whether they can keep such repayments
> going, and if so, how they'll have to retrench to do achieve it.
>
Talk of the oinks and the baas going - and the moos being the most likely
profitable? Are these all red herrings? I tseemed to me like they were
throwing out all the new stuff and keeping the slightly dicey old stuff.
Chris McMillan
<URL:mailto:ca...@icparc.ic.ac.uk> wrote:
> Heather Knowles wrote:
> >
> > Reflecting on life over a pint of Shires, Brenda Selwyn
> > <bre...@matson.demon.co.uk> writes
> > >he has already had his inheritance.
> >
> >
> > .
> > .
> > .
> > .
> > .
> >
> > .
> > .
> > .
> > .
> > .
> > .
> > .
> > .
> > .
> > .
> > .
> > .
> > .
> >
> > ....is Lizzie so angry?
>
P&J explained to D&R that the retirement house would be split equally
between Shula and Lizzie, they explained it the same way to Shulie - but I
don't recall them explaining how the retirement home would be split. I
wonder if Lizzie thinks she's being cut out without a bean because of LL.
OTOH, we mums all know that our hormones go bonkers after a birth so maybe
she's still not thinking straight.
Heather Knowles
>It only costs
>>about 65K for 4 bedrooms up here - ours is a detached 3 bedroom, and it
>>was on the market for 42K when we started renting.
>
>However, the commuting costs to Ambridge to babysit Pip & Josh & No3
>could be a bit prohibitive:-)
:) Daft bat.
<snips>
>The Big Book says that Glebe Cottage has 4 acres of land. I must say
>it's not obvious from the "aeriel view" map where that land is; the
>garden appears large, but not that large. However, it's another
>feature which might appeal to P&J.
That's a cunning thought there, Brenda.....
--
luv from the Strumpling Chucklet xxxxxxxxx
Fully paid-up member of HAHA
Robin Fairbairns
>Does Hollowtree still have a farmhouse?
no, it was converted into flats long since.
--
Robin Fairbairns, Cambridge
Fenny
bre...@matson.demon.co.uk says...
> Does she have a point though (hint, no)? On the face of it the
> division doesn't seem very fair - David gets land worth 1.5 million,
> Shula & Lizzie each get half of a 200K house and Kenton gets a lump
> sum.
>
And a lot of the machinery and other assets too. Therefore, his &
Ruth's "share" of the partnership's capital should not be counted in
P&J's potential estate when it comes to divvying up the inheritance.
--
Fenny
Fenny
bre...@matson.demon.co.uk says...
>
> If it's P&J to Glebe Cottage, I'm still favouring StS&A to the Grange
> about the Dower House? I know it was Caroline's home with Guy, but
> it's some time now since he died and one might think she might be
> rattling around a bit in there by herself (from the picture in the
> booklet attached to the map it appears to have about 6 bedrooms). But
> then Caroline to where?
>
to Caroline and buys Grange farmhouse.
--
Fenny
Stephen GC Tilley
Brenda Selwyn <bre...@matson.demon.co.uk> wrote:
< S N I P >
> The Big Book says that Glebe Cottage has 4 acres of land. I must say
> it's not obvious from the "aeriel view" map where that land is; the
> garden appears large, but not that large. However, it's another
> Shula, it may complicate matters even further (can't say more, Monday
> spoiler!).
>
> --
Four acres - you can get a lot of Prescott Terraces on that. Solution,
sell it off for development with 20% to council for social housing. In
the social housing terraced bit you could have:
No. 1. Sharon & Kylie
No. 2 The Grundys
No. 3 Jolene
No. 4 Cloive and partner
No. 5 Roy & Highley
No. 6 Baggy'n'Snatch and partner(s)
No. 7 Krait'n'Feebles
Now that could almost lead to a spin-off series!
It would however inject enough capital into the Archer family for her
saintliness to buy a property for Phil'n'Jill where they would be rent-
free tenants for life. She could then move into the Dower House and
Caroline back to the staff flat at Gay Grables.
Iain Archer
>
>All this reminds me of the Lord Peter Winsey story when Harriet was
>trying to explain to a particularly PC visitor why their sons were
>treated differently...(from memory)
>H: Well, Bredon's going to inherit as the eldest..
>PCV: I always think the French system, where the property is divided
>between the children equally is so much better for the children
>H: Maybe, but not for the property
>PCV: Surely Peter wouldn't favour his property above his children?
>H: (Laughing) Peter's a middle-aged man and he's reverting rapidly to
>type......
Talboys, the last of the final three LPW stories, and well remembered.
It was a Miss Quirk, a tiresome house guest (LPW: "She's a friend of my
sister-in-law's, said to need a country holiday. I feel we shall all
shortly need a town holiday.") much given to very theoretical child
psychologising, and wholly incomprehending of LPW's own discriminating
and unPC approach. (And written in 1942.)
--
Iain Archer
Stephen GC Tilley
chris harrison <ca...@icparc.ic.ac.uk> wrote:
> Stephen GC Tilley wrote:
> > This was the point I was trying to make ages ago. Phil'n'Jill did
not
> > build the business up from zero. Nor did they buy it, if the current
> > story-line (ex AFL) is to be followed. So morally it's not theirs to
> > dispose of without taking into account the other direct descendants
of
> > Dan'n'Doris.
>
> What's Chris' stake in the farm? When D&D died I presume Phil was
> "given" the farm because he was taking it on from his father, so
> Christine, while "given" the Stables wasn't involved in the farm, so
> didn't "benefit" through the inheritance.
>
> This, ISTM, is being reflected in David (and Ruth, benefitted as Jill
> did before her) taking on the farm from his father, but his siblings
> received "their due" in other ways.
>
'Yes, we own the farmhouse' one?
I think I'm struggling with bifurcated unreality.
Linda Fox
>
> Talk of the oinks and the baas going - and the moos being the most likely
> profitable? Are these all red herrings?
No, red herrings usually go bloob bloob bloob, and later sizzle-fizzle
sizzle-fizzle.
Linda ff
Tony Bryer
> She could then move into the Dower House and
> Caroline back to the staff flat at Gay Grables.
Do you know something we don't?
Tony Bryer
Stephen GC Tilley
Good Grief No, I'm just trying a scattergun approach to predictions in
the hope that one day I'll get one right - see thread on dot.com for
rationalisation.
Fenny
says...
>
> All this reminds me of the Lord Peter Winsey story when Harriet was
> trying to explain to a particularly PC visitor why their sons were
> treated differently...(from memory)
> H: Well, Bredon's going to inherit as the eldest..
> PCV: I always think the French system, where the property is divided
> between the children equally is so much better for the children
> H: Maybe, but not for the property
> PCV: Surely Peter wouldn't favour his property above his children?
> H: (Laughing) Peter's a middle-aged man and he's reverting rapidly to
> type......
>
to be beaten for stealing Mr Puffet's peaches.
--
Fenny
Brenda Selwyn
>Yes it is "Jill": according to next week's RT Patricia Greene is playing a
>part in "Doctors". (Cast list is printed on the Sunday evening page.)
However, reading the blub I suspect she may not be destined to be a
regular character. Her husband is played by Brian Cant!
Brenda Selwyn
>the night - cows calving, cows getting out and wandering onto the
>roundabouts of Basildon, foxes attacking the chickens, haystacks
>catching fire, the police wanting to search your buildings for stolen
>chainsaws that kind of thing.
LOL, for some reason...
>When my grandfather died in 1970 my father instantly moved back to the
>farmhouse from the cottage so that he'd be there overnight. In the end
>mum gave up living on her own in the cottage (well I was with her but
>only 2 at the time) and joined dad and grandmother in the farmhouse
>"temporarily" to put up with 13 years of "we don't cook potatoes like
>that in this house, dear" (as I think I've said before).
Didn't your grandmother fancy moving into the cottage? It sounds as
though D&R have been very lucky.