Is lead toxic to cats?
Frederique Rijsdijk
> Hello. Is mister kittens vulnerable to lead in his enviorment?
Every living creature is.
-- Frederique
http://cats.isafeelin.org
(pics, sounds and movies)
QED, eh ?
"Anonymous" <cri...@ecn.org> wrote in message
news:b187ef9f78422721...@ecn.org...
> NOTE: This message was sent thru a mail2news gateway.
> No effort was made to verify the identity of the sender.
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
> Hello. Is mister kittens vulnerable to lead in his enviorment?
Why wouldn't he be ?
What makes you ask ?
>
Willow Rosenberg
>Hello. Is mister kittens vulnerable to lead in his enviorment?
Yes, especially if the lead is in the form of lead paint.
When I bought my house the inspectors told me that if
it was painted prior to like 1960 it was a lead based paint.
Lead paint is harmful to pets as well as kids, and if
you are considering buying/renting/leasing property
with it you should check your local laws/regulations.
======================================================
To reply remove No spam from my e-mail address.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Bob Brenchley.
wrote:
>NOTE: This message was sent thru a mail2news gateway.
>No effort was made to verify the identity of the sender.
>--------------------------------------------------------
>
>Hello. Is mister kittens vulnerable to lead in his enviorment?
Yes, kittens are VERY vulnerable to lead because they do tend to lick
things a lot.
However, since lead paint is fairly rare now, and that tended to be
the main source, it is not something I woudl tend to worry about
unless you live in a very old house.
--
Bob.
Anything on the ground is a cat toy. Anything not there yet, will be.
Eric Lee Green
> On Anonymous <cri...@ecn.org> wrote:
>
>>Hello. Is mister kittens vulnerable to lead in his enviorment?
> Yes, especially if the lead is in the form of lead paint.
>
> When I bought my house the inspectors told me that if
> it was painted prior to like 1960 it was a lead based paint.
> Lead paint is harmful to pets as well as kids, and if
> you are considering buying/renting/leasing property
> with it you should check your local laws/regulations.
It's only harmful if the animal (and I include small children in
that category :-) eats the paint.
In other words: as long as you keep the lead-based paint covered up
with NON-lead-based-paint (i.e., any recent paint), it's not harmful
to anybody. So if you have peeling paint, you have problems -- otherwise,
not.
--
Eric Lee Green GnuPG public key at http://badtux.org/eric/eric.gpg
mailto:er...@badtux.org Web: http://www.badtux.org
Ted Davis
wrote:
>NOTE: This message was sent thru a mail2news gateway.
>No effort was made to verify the identity of the sender.
>--------------------------------------------------------
>
>Hello. Is mister kittens vulnerable to lead in his enviorment?
Yes, in all forms, especially when accompanied by gun power residue.
That has two meanings: the risk of someone shooting the cat, and the
risk from eating birds or small game shot with lead shotgun pellets
and not collected by the hunter.
T.E.D. (tda...@gearbox.maem.umr.edu - e-mail must contain "T.E.D." or my .sig in the body)
Willow Rosenberg
>It's only harmful if the animal (and I include small children in
>that category :-) eats the paint.
Here is a news flash for you: animals and children put
anything and everything in their mouth. Often if it is
there in plain site it goes in the mouth.
======================================================
To reply remove No spam from my e-mail address.
Willow Rosenberg
>However, since lead paint is fairly rare now, and that tended to be
>the main source, it is not something I woudl tend to worry about
>unless you live in a very old house.
I've been told by many house inspectors that if
it was painted more than a few years ago it is
lead paint. If it was painted as late as the 1950s it
is lead paint.
The last house I bought before this one was built in like
1895 and was filled with lead paint.
Bob Brenchley.
<Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>
>>However, since lead paint is fairly rare now, and that tended to be
>>the main source, it is not something I woudl tend to worry about
>>unless you live in a very old house.
>I've been told by many house inspectors that if
>it was painted more than a few years ago it is
>lead paint.
Lead paint has not been used in any great amount since the late 60s
early 70s. The chances of finding a house that hasn't been painted in
30 years are very low.
>If it was painted as late as the 1950s it
>is lead paint.
Of course, but there can't be many houses left that have not been
repainted in 40+ years.
>
>The last house I bought before this one was built in like
>1895 and was filled with lead paint.
Then clearly the people who have repainted it over the years did not
do a proper job of preparation.
I would never expect surface paint to be over 5 or 6 years old, and
anything with more than 3 or 4 layers of old paint is long overdue for
a strip.
--
Bob.
You have not been charged for this lesson. Please pass it to all your
friends so they may learn as well.
Ted Davis
<B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 24 Dec 2002 20:32:12 -0500, Willow Rosenberg
><Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>>
<snip>
>>
>>The last house I bought before this one was built in like
>>1895 and was filled with lead paint.
>
>Then clearly the people who have repainted it over the years did not
>do a proper job of preparation.
>
>I would never expect surface paint to be over 5 or 6 years old, and
>anything with more than 3 or 4 layers of old paint is long overdue for
>a strip.
Of course, the rest of us are thinking about interior trim paint while
you are discussing exterior paint. The latter is seldom a problem
these days, but interior trim is seldom in such bad shape that it has
to be stripped, at least in the estimation of the landlord. I own
such a house - it was built in the 1930's, moved to its current
location around 1943, and has been in my family since 1948, and to my
knowledge, the interior trim the interior has been repainted only two
or three times since we bought it, and none of those jobs required
stripping the old paint. I am quite sure there is quite a bit of
original lead (oil) paint still present under the newer latex stuff.
Bob Brenchley.
<tda...@gearbox.maem.umr.edu> wrote:
>On Wed, 25 Dec 2002 15:43:50 +0000, Bob Brenchley.
><B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 24 Dec 2002 20:32:12 -0500, Willow Rosenberg
>><Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>>>
><snip>
>>>
>>>The last house I bought before this one was built in like
>>>1895 and was filled with lead paint.
>>
>>Then clearly the people who have repainted it over the years did not
>>do a proper job of preparation.
>>
>>I would never expect surface paint to be over 5 or 6 years old, and
>>anything with more than 3 or 4 layers of old paint is long overdue for
>>a strip.
>
>Of course, the rest of us are thinking about interior trim paint while
>you are discussing exterior paint.
Wrong.
> The latter is seldom a problem
>these days, but interior trim is seldom in such bad shape that it has
>to be stripped, at least in the estimation of the landlord.
WTF has it got to do with the landlord?
>I own
>such a house - it was built in the 1930's, moved to its current
>location around 1943, and has been in my family since 1948, and to my
>knowledge, the interior trim the interior has been repainted only two
>or three times since we bought it,
Disgusting.
>and none of those jobs required
>stripping the old paint. I am quite sure there is quite a bit of
>original lead (oil) paint still present under the newer latex stuff.
Stripping, either with a hot air gun or with chemical stripper, would
be something done at least every three repaints. If it wasn't we would
never be able to close doors or windows.
We have lived in this house for 29 years, and in that time there
cannot be a single piece of wood that has not been stripped at least
twice. The window frames are metal, so they get stripped every time
they are repainted. Interior doors get done every second or third
repaint, though in recent years we have been moving to varnishing
doors.
Oh, and in the UK it would, in most cases, be the tenants
responsibility to keep the house in good decorative order inside, not
the landlords.
HTH.
--
Bob.
"You cannot move mountains if you believe them to be mountains.
You must think of them as collections of small stones,
Which can be moved one at a time, and then reassembled."
-- The Tao of Meow
Willow Rosenberg
>Lead paint has not been used in any great amount since the late 60s
>early 70s. The chances of finding a house that hasn't been painted in
>30 years are very low.
The house I bought just prior to my current house had
much of it's original paint still on the walls in
amazingly good shape. It was all lead. Apparently the
rooms were painted many years ago using lead paint
and did such a good job then that for the most
part it a new paint job was not needed.
This was about serveral years ago and the
original paint job was apparently done in the
50s.
I had lots of people in to look at
getting the house ready to
sell and the universal opinion of
all was that it was lead paint.
Willow Rosenberg
>Of course, but there can't be many houses left that have not been
>repainted in 40+ years.
You haven't looked for a house lately have you? Try
looking at houses that are more than 2 years old.
Willow Rosenberg
>Then clearly the people who have repainted it over the years did not
>do a proper job of preparation.
>
>I would never expect surface paint to be over 5 or 6 years old, and
>anything with more than 3 or 4 layers of old paint is long overdue for
>a strip.
The unversal opinions of those people
we had looked at the job was that
this was indeed the original paint used
in the 40s and 50s. They didn't know
how or why but it was indeed the
original paint. They could tell by the paint
used, what was under the paint, etc.
The paint was not in layers. It was a single coat
on the walls.
Willow Rosenberg
>> The latter is seldom a problem
>>these days, but interior trim is seldom in such bad shape that it has
>>to be stripped, at least in the estimation of the landlord.
>
>WTF has it got to do with the landlord?
The paint may be in great shape but if you are
a landlord around here and the tenants have
kids under six the lead paint must be taken
care of. (And yes it often costs the landlord
more than $60,000 to have it taken care of)
The government provides strict lead paint
laws).
Willow Rosenberg
>>I own
>>such a house - it was built in the 1930's, moved to its current
>>location around 1943, and has been in my family since 1948, and to my
>>knowledge, the interior trim the interior has been repainted only two
>>or three times since we bought it,
>
>Disgusting.
And what is disgusting about it? That they moved the
house?
Ted Davis
<B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>WTF has it got to do with the landlord?
For one thing, *I'm* a landlord - the house I mentioned owning is a
rental.
You must work really hard at missing the point.
Dee
I need to go out of town overnight, and have never left my cat Stormy
since he started having seizures. He takes phenobarbital twice a day to
control his condition. My options are to board him with the vet and be
assured that he gets his pill (but will quite possibly not eat), or to
leave him home (with Misty, Sam, George, and the Christmas guest cat
Manchito) with automatic feeders and his medication crushed into his food
and fed at twelve hour intervals (taking the chance that he may not
eat quite all of his food). What would you suggest? My oldest cat
is 10 and since I've had cats I've traveled with them as well.
Dee
Sherry
I'm not sure how dog epilepsy compares to cat seizures, but our dachchsund once
went into nonstop granmal seizures and had to be taken to the vet to stop them,
and given oxygen. She was on phenobarb also and we were never sure what caused
the episode. I'm not sure what would have happend had we not been home. Not to
scare you, but especially if you can't be sure she's ingesting all of her meds,
you just never know. What about someone coming over to administer the phenobarb
and check on them a couple times a day?
Sherry
jmilam
be. It is TOO stressful for your cat to be boarded with barking dogs. That
alone will cause some seizures. One night at the vet will do more damage,
than good.
"Sherry " <srid...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021226014854...@mb-ck.aol.com...
Sherry
>be. It is TOO stressful for your cat to be boarded with barking dogs. That
>alone will cause some seizures. One night at the vet will do more damage,
>than good.
That's a good point. Stress *can* contribute to seizures.
Sherry
Ted Davis
I'm not the person to ask about that - I'm currently cat sitting a
friend's cat that has a urinary infection, and I have completely
failed to get the medicine into the cat. The only cage I have is the
one I use for introducing new cats into the family - the carrier
attaches to one end, and provides a refuge for the cat.
Unfortunately, I can get only one hand into the carrier part, and this
cat has threatened me with bodily harm if I try to pull him out ...
and he *will not* come out on his own except to use the litter pan and
drink a bit of water, though he will let me pet him.
BTW, what's UMD? The "UMR" in my address is "University of Missouri -
Rolla" - I tend to try to think of any um?.edu in terms of the
University of Missouri system, and the 'd' rings no bells (there *are*
other states whose names begin with 'M', though).
Ted Davis
Jose (pronounced jo - see, the cat I'm sitting) isn't having seizures,
but he is caged up in a house with a dozen other cats, often with one
on top of his cage, and he appears definitely stressed out. I am not
happy about this, especially since I can't go anywhere yet because of
the foot of snow we got Xmas eve and the night before, and the
unfortunate situation that my front-wheel drive car is in the shop and
all I have to drive is my read-wheel drive pickup truck that put me in
the ditch the last time we had a little snow. There are drawbacks to
being the "cat man" and living out in the boondocks.
Sherry
>but he is caged up in a house with a dozen other cats, often with one
>on top of his cage, and he appears definitely stressed out. I am not
>happy about this, especially since I can't go anywhere yet because of
>the foot of snow we got Xmas eve and the night before, and the
>unfortunate situation that my front-wheel drive car is in the shop and
>all I have to drive is my read-wheel drive pickup truck that put me in
>the ditch the last time we had a little snow. There are drawbacks to
>being the "cat man" and living out in the boondocks.
>
>
>T.E.D. (tda...@gearbox.maem.umr.edu - e-mail must contain "T.E.D." or my .sig
>in the body)
>
Sherry
Bob Brenchley.
<Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>
>>>I own
>>>such a house - it was built in the 1930's, moved to its current
>>>location around 1943, and has been in my family since 1948, and to my
>>>knowledge, the interior trim the interior has been repainted only two
>>>or three times since we bought it,
>>
>>Disgusting.
>And what is disgusting about it? That they moved the
>house?
>
2002-1948=54years
To only repaint 2 or 3 times in 54 years is nothing short of
disgusting. Obviously someone is prepared to live in a dump, glad to
say most people keep their homes in good decorative order.
Bob Brenchley.
<tda...@gearbox.maem.umr.edu> wrote:
>On Wed, 25 Dec 2002 21:06:50 +0000, Bob Brenchley.
><B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>
>>WTF has it got to do with the landlord?
>
>For one thing, *I'm* a landlord
So what?
>- the house I mentioned owning is a
>rental.
So what?
>
>You must work really hard at missing the point.
>
Not half as well as you work at being a moron.
The point is "what has the decorative state of the house to do with
the landlord?"
Other than requiring a tenant to keep the house in good order, and
maybe requiring a deposit to cover redecorating if the house if not
left in good order on leaving, everything is up to the tenant.
In addition, as pointed out, anyone who has not redecorated enough to
have rid the house of lead paint long ago is a very poor home owner,
landlord or tenant - whichever fits.
--
Bob.
Your IQ score is 2 (it takes 3 to grunt).
Bob Brenchley.
<Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>
>>Lead paint has not been used in any great amount since the late 60s
>>early 70s. The chances of finding a house that hasn't been painted in
>>30 years are very low.
>The house I bought just prior to my current house had
>much of it's original paint still on the walls in
>amazingly good shape. It was all lead. Apparently the
>rooms were painted many years ago using lead paint
>and did such a good job then that for the most
>part it a new paint job was not needed.
>
>This was about serveral years ago and the
>original paint job was apparently done in the
>50s.
All I can say is that the owners could not have been very house-proud.
>
>I had lots of people in to look at
>getting the house ready to
>sell and the universal opinion of
>all was that it was lead paint.
If done in the 50s it may well have been, but there cannot be many
houses as neglected as that still around.
Bob Brenchley.
<Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>
>>Of course, but there can't be many houses left that have not been
>>repainted in 40+ years.
>You haven't looked for a house lately have you?
Yes, lots. My son was house hunting only 3 years ago, and a close
friend moved only a month ago and I went to see lots of places with
him.
> Try
>looking at houses that are more than 2 years old.
Wouldn't touch one under 50 years old. Try looking at a few that are
four hundred years old (or more).
--
Bob.
She's depriving a village somewhere of an idiot.
Bob Brenchley.
<Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>
>>Then clearly the people who have repainted it over the years did not
>>do a proper job of preparation.
>>
>>I would never expect surface paint to be over 5 or 6 years old, and
>>anything with more than 3 or 4 layers of old paint is long overdue for
>>a strip.
>The unversal opinions of those people
>we had looked at the job was that
>this was indeed the original paint used
>in the 40s and 50s.
Then I hope you got the house at a bargain price because one as
neglected as that will have a lot of problems to sort out.
> They didn't know
>how or why but it was indeed the
>original paint. They could tell by the paint
>used, what was under the paint, etc.
>
>The paint was not in layers. It was a single coat
>on the walls.
On the walls??? Since when has lead paint been used on walls???
Bob Brenchley.
NEVER - EVER leave cats on their own for that long - even healthy
ones.
Get someone to come in and feed them and give them some attention.
--
Bob.
Anything on the ground is a cat toy. Anything not there yet, will be.
Eric Lee Green
> On Wed, 25 Dec 2002 18:09:51 -0500, Willow Rosenberg
><Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>And what is disgusting about it? That they moved the
>>house?
>>
> 2002-1948=54years
>
> To only repaint 2 or 3 times in 54 years is nothing short of
> disgusting.
There's this stuff called SOAP and WATER, y'see, and there's this
stuff called WASHABLE PAINT, y'know? Oh, I forget, you live in a dank
island kingdom where such things are not sold.
> Obviously someone is prepared to live in a dump, glad to
> say most people keep their homes in good decorative order.
Please note that here in America, leases typically prohibit tenants
from repainting. This is because tenants typically have, uhm,
eclectic, tastes. A house that has been repainted a shocking orange
is going to be quite difficult to re-rent without costing money to
re-paint it.
--
Eric Lee Green GnuPG public key at http://badtux.org/eric/eric.gpg
mailto:er...@badtux.org Web: http://www.badtux.org
Willow Rosenberg
>To only repaint 2 or 3 times in 54 years is nothing short of
>disgusting. Obviously someone is prepared to live in a dump, glad to
>say most people keep their homes in good decorative order.
I beg to differ. When I bought the house before this one
it was 105 years old, it apparrently was last painted
in the 50s and was in immaculate shape.
This house was apparently last painted in the
50s, there was only one coat used, the no old
paint under this one coat.
Nobody knew what the previous owner did but
this hosue was in excellent shape and not a dump.
Quality paint? Quality craftsmanship? We still don't
know.
Willow Rosenberg
>>This was about serveral years ago and the
>>original paint job was apparently done in the
>>50s.
>
>All I can say is that the owners could not have been very house-proud
Why because their house was in immaculate condition?
Willow Rosenberg
>>I had lots of people in to look at
>>getting the house ready to
>>sell and the universal opinion of
>>all was that it was lead paint.
>
>If done in the 50s it may well have been, but there cannot be many
>houses as neglected as that still around.
This house was not neglected, many years later it
was in immaculate condition.
Willow Rosenberg
>>The unversal opinions of those people
>>we had looked at the job was that
>>this was indeed the original paint used
>>in the 40s and 50s.
>
>Then I hope you got the house at a bargain price because one as
>neglected as that will have a lot of problems to sort out.
Not that the inspectors could find. We had several house
inspections done with certified inspectors and the house
was in excellent condition.
The only real problems were stuff like the plumbing was the
original plumbing, much of the wiring was the original
wiring, etc.
The house was definetly not neglected.
Willow Rosenberg
>On the walls??? Since when has lead paint been used on walls???
Around here all paint as late as the 50s was lead paint.
Ted Davis
There is no way I'm going to turn an unknown sick cat just out of
hospital loose in a house with a dozen other cats, including Boots the
bully, and a cat flap on the back door - he might never be seen again,
or he might infect the resident cats. He's stressed enough without
having to face all those other cats and a new environment - his human
put him in the carrier so I never had to handle him, and he feels ...
and is ... safe there, as well as being in a warm dark place somewhat
like a hollow log.
It's not the usual cage you might be thinking of: it's four feet long
by two feet high and deep, and the carrier attaches to one end - it's
large and comfortable (if you're a cat). Picture:
<http://gearbox.maem.umr.edu/tdavis/cats/cage.1.600x400.jpg>
Ted Davis
<B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>The point is "what has the decorative state of the house to do with
>the landlord?"
Right off the bat, I can't think of a single person with an IQ above
that of a cold room not understanding that landlords are interested in
the bottom line, and the cost of painting (part of it anyway) comes
out of the profit (and usually can to be done only while the house is
empty). Anytime I repaint a rental property, the property loses money
for the year - other landlords have similar situations. Only at the
high rent for cheap property end of the scale is frequent repainting
economically feasible (and since around here that is usually Section 8
housing for welfare recipients, it may be done even less often).
Sherry
>>the landlord?"
>
>Right off the bat, I can't think of a single person with an IQ above
>that of a cold room not understanding that landlords are interested in
>the bottom line, and the cost of painting (part of it anyway) comes
>out of the profit (and usually can to be done only while the house is
>empty). Anytime I repaint a rental property, the property loses money
>for the year - other landlords have similar situations. Only at the
>high rent for cheap property end of the scale is frequent repainting
>economically feasible (and since around here that is usually Section 8
>housing for welfare recipients, it may be done even less often).
>
>
>T.E.D.
My tenants last year asked if they could paint their nursery room...I said, of
course, and even reimbursed them for the paint. They painted the room purple
and painted the woodwork pink. It was horrible.
Sherry
Willow Rosenberg
>Decades ago heard an anecdote from the US where tenants of an
>apartment tried for some months to get the landlord to repaint the
>interior, with no success.
>
>According to the story they finally got him to agree to pay for the
>paint if they did the work.
>
>As I heard it, they covered the whole interior, including windows,
>with two coats of gloss black enamel, stayed until rent was up and
>deposit cleared, then quickly moved out.
I've lived in many apartments over the years. An apartment
may not get painted because the landlord refuses to spend
money on fixing the roof and other major problems. In that
situation I would not paint the slum lords property.
I would also point out that people who lived through the
great depression (1929 in the US) are extremely frugal
and will opt to spend little or nothing if they can do
without or do it themselves.
Also there was a time in the US when people took pride in
their work, when they painted it was done right the first
time with the right materials and they didn't do a half
assed job like they do today.
======================================================
To reply remove No spam from my e-mail address.
Willow Rosenberg
>Right off the bat, I can't think of a single person with an IQ above
>that of a cold room not understanding that landlords are interested in
>the bottom line, and the cost of painting (part of it anyway) comes
>out of the profit (and usually can to be done only while the house is
>empty). Anytime I repaint a rental property, the property loses money
>for the year - other landlords have similar situations. Only at the
>high rent for cheap property end of the scale is frequent repainting
>economically feasible (and since around here that is usually Section 8
>housing for welfare recipients, it may be done even less often).
Oh gee....section 8......I hate section 8. We've got
landlords who actually have the nerve to advertise for
section 8 people only.
The idea being that section 8 people will guarantee income
to landlord while working people run the risk of being laid
off.
Eric Lee Green
> On Wed, 25 Dec 2002 18:04:43 -0500, Willow Rosenberg
>>how or why but it was indeed the
>>original paint. They could tell by the paint
>>used, what was under the paint, etc.
>>
>>The paint was not in layers. It was a single coat
>>on the walls.
>
> On the walls??? Since when has lead paint been used on walls???
From approximately 1800, when it was first discovered that adding a
small amount of lead to paint base would make it spread more smoothly,
to 1973, here in the United States. What's your point?
--
Eric Lee Green GnuPG public key at http://badtux.org/eric/eric.gpg
mailto:er...@badtux.org Web: http://www.badtux.org
Jeanette
Ted Davis <tda...@gearbox.maem.umr.edu> wrote in message
news:lvan0v012bl09fo7u...@4ax.com...
Yes, the house might make a small overall loss, if you are including the
interest costs of the mortgage, but the value of the house is maintained,
and you have a valuable capital asset when the house is finally paid for. I
only rent out one house, but I'm happy to break even at the end of the year,
so long as the house is in as good a condition as it was the previous year.
Jeanette
QED, eh ?
Or are you Joshua's alter-ego ?
If so, does Joshua have anything he'd like to tell us ?
"Willow Rosenberg" <Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:382i0v8mubaus72qh...@4ax.com...
> On Eric Lee Green <er...@badtux.org> wrote:
>
> >It's only harmful if the animal (and I include small children in
> >that category :-) eats the paint.
> Here is a news flash for you: animals and children put
> anything and everything in their mouth. Often if it is
> there in plain site it goes in the mouth.
>
> ======================================================
> To reply remove No spam from my e-mail address.
>
>
Joshua Rosenblatt
<qed...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>Willow, are you any relation to Joshua ?
not that I know of, though parhaps there is a common rosen somewhre
down the line....
>Or are you Joshua's alter-ego ?
Joshua's ego is to big to alter much of anything...
>If so, does Joshua have anything he'd like to tell us ?
OK OK, it was me. I admit it!
In December of 1984, I sprayed the PAM on the floor at the entrance of
the men's lavatory at Crestwood high school resulting in Mrs.
Schweitzer falling and breaking her tailbone. It was merely an
attempt to protect us young & oppressed smokers from gettting busted-
and it backfired. Not a day has assed that I haven't thought of Mrs
Schwietzer's ass.
Joshua
Joshua Rosenblatt
<joshuaro...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>In December of 1984, I sprayed the PAM on the floor at the entrance of
>the men's lavatory at Crestwood high school resulting in Mrs.
>Schweitzer falling and breaking her tailbone. It was merely an
>attempt to protect us young & oppressed smokers from gettting busted-
>and it backfired. Not a day has assed
err, make that PASSED
err, Freud eat yer heart out baby.
>
>Joshua
Bob Brenchley.
>In article <bbcm0v8ud9kn038f9...@4ax.com>, Bob Brenchley ruminated:
>> On Wed, 25 Dec 2002 18:09:51 -0500, Willow Rosenberg
>><Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>And what is disgusting about it? That they moved the
>>>house?
>>>
>> 2002-1948=54years
>>
>> To only repaint 2 or 3 times in 54 years is nothing short of
>> disgusting.
>
>There's this stuff called SOAP and WATER, y'see, and there's this
>stuff called WASHABLE PAINT, y'know? Oh, I forget, you live in a dank
>island kingdom where such things are not sold.
Actually, I live in the country where most of those were invented.
I also live in a country that likes to decorate, to change colours
ever few years, to see our homes looking good.
Sad you don't feel the same.
>
>> Obviously someone is prepared to live in a dump, glad to
>> say most people keep their homes in good decorative order.
>
>Please note that here in America, leases typically prohibit tenants
>from repainting. This is because tenants typically have, uhm,
>eclectic, tastes. A house that has been repainted a shocking orange
>is going to be quite difficult to re-rent without costing money to
>re-paint it.
Our leases, though the majority of homes are owned in the UK - not
rented, would include a clause that the tenant is responsible for
repainting but should clear colour choice with the landlord. Either
that or a clause requiring a repaint on exit if the landlord had no
approved the colour. But the right of a tenant to repaint, to make the
house their home, is one that the law would back.
The only possible exclusions to that would be a house protected by a
preservation order (known as a "listed" building). In those cases it
is much harder, especially if you want to change the outside colour.
Bob Brenchley.
<Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>
>>To only repaint 2 or 3 times in 54 years is nothing short of
>>disgusting. Obviously someone is prepared to live in a dump, glad to
>>say most people keep their homes in good decorative order.
>I beg to differ. When I bought the house before this one
>it was 105 years old, it apparrently was last painted
>in the 50s and was in immaculate shape.
As I said, I'm glad most people like to keep their houses in GOOD
decorative order.
>
>This house was apparently last painted in the
>50s, there was only one coat used, the no old
>paint under this one coat.
Good, it was properly stripped and treated. But 50 years is a long
time and wood is moves - one reason it needs painting every few years.
>
>Nobody knew what the previous owner did but
>this hosue was in excellent shape and not a dump.
>Quality paint? Quality craftsmanship? We still don't
>know.
More like tight fisted.
--
Bob.
Before they invented drawing boards, what did they go back to?
Bob Brenchley.
>Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, 25 Dec 2002 18:09:51 -0500, Willow Rosenberg
>> <Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >>>I own
>> >>>such a house - it was built in the 1930's, moved to its current
>> >>>location around 1943, and has been in my family since 1948, and to my
>> >>>knowledge, the interior trim the interior has been repainted only two
>> >>>or three times since we bought it,
>> >>
>> >>Disgusting.
>> >And what is disgusting about it? That they moved the
>> >house?
>> >
>> 2002-1948=54years
>>
>> To only repaint 2 or 3 times in 54 years is nothing short of
>> disgusting. Obviously someone is prepared to live in a dump, glad to
>> say most people keep their homes in good decorative order.
>
>Guess the UK hasn't discovered premium paints like Behr, which need little
>or no replacement if applied and primed properly. But Bob inherited his
>domicile from government housing anyway, so what does he know about
>long-term upkeep?
You really do come out with some daft ideas Foot-Rot. [still, you will
never beat the lie about the ex SAS officer who became a Guardsman -
that was just the best tall story I ever heard.]
>
>Plus, not everyone paints wood. After removing the paint from my home's
>oak mantel and skirtings in 1999, I applied several layers of shellac and
>finished off with traditional wax. They'll never need painting. Ever.
No, but it will need stripping and retreating every ten or so years.
>
>Considering Brainbox Bob's own lack of hygiene and slovenly personal upkeep
>as seen in pictures scattered round the Net, he isn't remotely qualified to
>talk about "good decorative order". He needs a personal trainer and a
>dentist pronto.
Oh dear, your are on a lying fest today Foot-Rot. Maybe you are
thinking of yourself?
--
Bob.
Everyone is entitled to be stupid but you're abusing the privilege.
Bob Brenchley.
<Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>
>>>This was about serveral years ago and the
>>>original paint job was apparently done in the
>>>50s.
>>
>>All I can say is that the owners could not have been very house-proud
>Why because their house was in immaculate condition?
>
Because they were too tight fisted to spend money on decorating their
home.
Bob Brenchley.
<tda...@gearbox.maem.umr.edu> wrote:
>On Thu, 26 Dec 2002 16:50:53 +0000, Bob Brenchley.
><B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>
>>The point is "what has the decorative state of the house to do with
>>the landlord?"
>
>Right off the bat, I can't think of a single person with an IQ above
>that of a cold room not understanding that landlords are interested in
>the bottom line, and the cost of painting (part of it anyway) comes
>out of the profit (and usually can to be done only while the house is
>empty).
Talk about a MORON! First, it is rare for a landlord to be responsible
for decoration, except maybe the outside of the house. Second, where
the firking hell did you get the daft idea that you can only decorate
an empty house?
>Anytime I repaint a rental property, the property loses money
>for the year
A 'YEAR' - bloody hell man do you paint it with an artist's brush? The
last time I had the outside of the house painted it took two days.
Inside I would allow three days per room if walls are painted, and
extra day for wallpaper. On an empty house (oh the luxury of being
able to have an empty house to do) I would say a week for a good job
with a normal team of decorators. Christ, we had new people move in
next door a couple of weeks ago and they redecorated all the
downstairs rooms in less than a week - and still went to work during
the day.
> - other landlords have similar situations. Only at the
>high rent for cheap property end of the scale is frequent repainting
>economically feasible (and since around here that is usually Section 8
>housing for welfare recipients, it may be done even less often).
Round here we have laws to stop cowboy landlords like you.
--
Bob.
I see you've set aside this special time to humiliate yourself in
public.
Bob Brenchley.
<Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>
>>>I had lots of people in to look at
>>>getting the house ready to
>>>sell and the universal opinion of
>>>all was that it was lead paint.
>>
>>If done in the 50s it may well have been, but there cannot be many
>>houses as neglected as that still around.
>This house was not neglected, many years later it
>was in immaculate condition.
A house that does not get pained at regular intervals is not being
looked after.
Bob Brenchley.
<Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>
>>>The unversal opinions of those people
>>>we had looked at the job was that
>>>this was indeed the original paint used
>>>in the 40s and 50s.
>>
>>Then I hope you got the house at a bargain price because one as
>>neglected as that will have a lot of problems to sort out.
>Not that the inspectors could find. We had several house
>inspections done with certified inspectors and the house
>was in excellent condition.
As I said, I hope you got the house at a bargain price because one as
neglected as that will have a lot of problems to sort out.
>
>The only real problems were stuff like the plumbing was the
>original plumbing, much of the wiring was the original
>wiring, etc.
Ye Gods!
>
>The house was definetly not neglected.
If you believe that then you are a total moron.
Bob Brenchley.
<Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>
>>On the walls??? Since when has lead paint been used on walls???
>Around here all paint as late as the 50s was lead paint.
Hohohohoho!!! Pull the other one - its got bells on.
--
Bob.
I tell you what, you should be on educational TV, you certainly make
me feel so much smarter..?
Bob Brenchley.
>In article <p3dm0vc84kb9psdeb...@4ax.com>, Bob Brenchley ruminated:
>> On Wed, 25 Dec 2002 18:04:43 -0500, Willow Rosenberg
>>> They didn't know
>>>how or why but it was indeed the
>>>original paint. They could tell by the paint
>>>used, what was under the paint, etc.
>>>
>>>The paint was not in layers. It was a single coat
>>>on the walls.
>>
>> On the walls??? Since when has lead paint been used on walls???
>
>From approximately 1800, when it was first discovered that adding a
>small amount of lead to paint base would make it spread more smoothly,
>to 1973, here in the United States. What's your point?
The point is lead was only added to gloss (or eggshell) oil based
paint - not to the matt paint normally used on walls. It also had
nothing to do with spreading, lead helped to lock the colour pigments
making the colours last longer without fading.
Oh, and it was 1978 when lead paint was banned for household use.
Willow Rosenberg
>Willow, are you any relation to Joshua ?
No. Who is Joshua?
Willow Rosenberg
>More like tight fisted.
Only the guy who did it knows. By the time I bought the
house he had died so only he knows what he did.
Tight fisted is very common with those who lived
through the great depression (1929).
Willow Rosenberg
>Because they were too tight fisted to spend money on decorating their
>home.
And if they lived through the great depression they didn't
spend unless they had to. Try reading up on the great
depression (1929) sometime to understand the mindset.
Willow Rosenberg
>A house that does not get pained at regular intervals is not being
>looked after.
Not everyone lives at home with rich parents like you do.
Willow Rosenberg
>As I said, I hope you got the house at a bargain price because one as
>neglected as that will have a lot of problems to sort out.
The house was definitely not neglected.
Willow Rosenberg
>>The house was definetly not neglected.
>
>If you believe that then you are a total moron.
Just because it is old does not mean it was neglected.
QED, eh ?
> On "QED, eh ?" <qed...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> >Willow, are you any relation to Joshua ?
> No. Who is Joshua?
Joshua is also Rosenberg - sometime denizen of alt.cats.
I guess ultimately, we're all related (although, I've heard say that there's
some doubt about Mr.Brenchley).
Ted Davis
<Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Ted Davis <tda...@gearbox.maem.umr.edu> wrote:
>
>>Right off the bat, I can't think of a single person with an IQ above
>>that of a cold room not understanding that landlords are interested in
>>the bottom line, and the cost of painting (part of it anyway) comes
>>out of the profit (and usually can to be done only while the house is
>>empty). Anytime I repaint a rental property, the property loses money
>>for the year - other landlords have similar situations. Only at the
>>high rent for cheap property end of the scale is frequent repainting
>>economically feasible (and since around here that is usually Section 8
>>housing for welfare recipients, it may be done even less often).
>Oh gee....section 8......I hate section 8. We've got
>landlords who actually have the nerve to advertise for
>section 8 people only.
>
>The idea being that section 8 people will guarantee income
>to landlord while working people run the risk of being laid
>off.
And that the state will pay what you ask without making sure that the
property is actually worth the asking rent.
Karen
B...@format.publications.ukf.net wrote on 12/27/02 12:44 PM:
>> Anytime I repaint a rental property, the property loses money
>> for the year
>
> A 'YEAR' - bloody hell man do you paint it with an artist's brush?
OK. This was genuinely funny.
Karen
Karen
Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com wrote on 12/27/02 3:21 PM:
Was ist Sylvia?
Karen
Ted Davis
<B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>On Thu, 26 Dec 2002 19:40:36 -0600, Ted Davis
><tda...@gearbox.maem.umr.edu> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 26 Dec 2002 16:50:53 +0000, Bob Brenchley.
>><B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>>
>>>The point is "what has the decorative state of the house to do with
>>>the landlord?"
>>
>>Right off the bat, I can't think of a single person with an IQ above
>>that of a cold room not understanding that landlords are interested in
>>the bottom line, and the cost of painting (part of it anyway) comes
>>out of the profit (and usually can to be done only while the house is
>>empty).
>
>Talk about a MORON! First, it is rare for a landlord to be responsible
>for decoration, except maybe the outside of the house. Second, where
>the firking hell did you get the daft idea that you can only decorate
>an empty house?
I can't decide whether you really are totally ignorant of tenant
behavior and legal liability, or whether you are just totally isolated
from the real world.
Imagine, if you will, that you own a rental unit somewhere in the US,
and that is rented to a lawyer with an asthmatic child, a wife he
throws around, a dog, and a cat. Now paint the interior while they
are there.
Lawsuit #1: invasion of privacy
Lawsuit #2 (the big one): poisoning the child with the fumes
Lawsuit #3: costs of replacing all the clothes damaged by bumping
into (and being thrown into) the wet paint, and the costs of clipping
the animals
Then you still have to repaint the interior because of all the smudges
and embedded animal hairs.
>
>>Anytime I repaint a rental property, the property loses money
>>for the year
>
>A 'YEAR' - bloody hell man do you paint it with an artist's brush? The
>last time I had the outside of the house painted it took two days.
>Inside I would allow three days per room if walls are painted, and
>extra day for wallpaper. On an empty house (oh the luxury of being
>able to have an empty house to do) I would say a week for a good job
>with a normal team of decorators. Christ, we had new people move in
>next door a couple of weeks ago and they redecorated all the
>downstairs rooms in less than a week - and still went to work during
>the day.
The margin on rental property is not always very large, and one often
has to hire this work done, especially me since it takes over twelve
hours to get to the house by air and rental car.
>
>> - other landlords have similar situations. Only at the
>>high rent for cheap property end of the scale is frequent repainting
>>economically feasible (and since around here that is usually Section 8
>>housing for welfare recipients, it may be done even less often).
>
>Round here we have laws to stop cowboy landlords like you.
I wonder if I can sue you from here - that, along with many other of
your nasty remarks - is totally uncalled for, and completely
unfounded. As a matter of fact, I have instructed my agent to
carefully select the tenants within the limits of the equal
opportunity laws to keep out the riff-raff.
zuz...@webtv.net
>sitting) isn't having seizures, but he is
>caged up in a house with a dozen other
>cats, often with one on top of his cage,
>and he appears definitely stressed out.
You need to change this setup immediately and isolate this cat from the
other cats. Stressing this cat out unnecessarily is not only unfair to
him, but will exacerbate his untreated condition. which is serious and
can become life threatening. It's no wonder you can't get his medicine
into him. You have an obligation to do everything possible to alleviate
this cat's stress and medicate him, no matter what. Since he is already
in a carrier, set up your bathroom with food, water and a litterbox and
bring him in there and leave him there until your friend comes to get
him. Once he is in the bathroom, make a nice bed for him with some
towels and take the carrier out so he has nowhere to hide. Chances are
that being completely isolated from the other cats will improve his
disposition immensely, and you may be able to medicate him easily.
Regardless, you'll be able to catch him easily. You cannot allow this
cat to remain unmedicated, especially considering the fact that you are
snowed in. If he gets blocked, and there is no way to get him to the
vet, he will die. You cannot allow things to continue as they are.
Megan
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do
nothing."
-Edmund Burke
Learn The TRUTH About Declawing
http://www.stopdeclaw.com
Zuzu's Cats Photo Album:
http://www.PictureTrail.com/zuzu22
zuz...@webtv.net
>have never left my cat Stormy since he
>started having seizures. He takes
>phenobarbital twice a day to control his
>condition. My options are to board him
>with the vet and be assured that he gets
>his pill (but will quite possibly not eat), or
>to leave him home (with Misty, Sam,
>George, and the Christmas guest cat
>Manchito) with automatic feeders and his
>medication crushed into his food and fed
>at twelve hour intervals (taking the chance
>that he may not eat quite all of his food).
>What would you suggest? My oldest cat is
>10 and since I've had cats I've traveled
>with them as well.
Option one is better than option two, which is absolutely unnacceptable.
I have an epileptic cat and when I have had to go out of town I have
someone stay at my house. If I can't get someone to stay I don't go. If
you don't have a friend that can stay overnight, call your local
veterinarians and ask them for the name of a reliable petsitter. The
petsitter can come twice a day (and occasionally you can find someone
that will spend the night), pill your cat, and take the cat to the vet
if something is amiss. I would never leave the cats with automatic
feeders. I have heard of two many situations where the feeder broke and
the cats went hungry.
In your case it would mean your cat would go without medication as well,
or it's possible one of the other cats would eat the food meant for the
epileptic.
Ted Davis
>>Jose (pronounced jo - see, the cat I'm
>>sitting) isn't having seizures, but he is
>>caged up in a house with a dozen other
>>cats, often with one on top of his cage,
>>and he appears definitely stressed out.
>
> You need to change this setup immediately and isolate this cat from the
>other cats. Stressing this cat out unnecessarily is not only unfair to
>him, but will exacerbate his untreated condition. which is serious and
>can become life threatening. It's no wonder you can't get his medicine
>into him. You have an obligation to do everything possible to alleviate
>this cat's stress and medicate him, no matter what. Since he is already
>in a carrier, set up your bathroom with food, water and a litterbox and
>bring him in there and leave him there until your friend comes to get
>him. Once he is in the bathroom, make a nice bed for him with some
>towels and take the carrier out so he has nowhere to hide. Chances are
>that being completely isolated from the other cats will improve his
>disposition immensely, and you may be able to medicate him easily.
>Regardless, you'll be able to catch him easily. You cannot allow this
>cat to remain unmedicated, especially considering the fact that you are
>snowed in. If he gets blocked, and there is no way to get him to the
>vet, he will die. You cannot allow things to continue as they are.
Not feasible: I like my carpet, and a closed interior door causes
shredded carpet at its base. I made arrangements for someone with
four-wheel drive to come get him if he had to go back to the vet. In
any case, he's gone: Tracy came to get him last night, and he was in
pretty good condition. He came out of the carrier to survey the
situation yesterday morning, and had calmed down and groomed himself
by evening. I'm glad it's over: Boots got completely out of hand and
all but destroyed the kitchen. I am now trying to convince Boots that
he is a strictly outdoor cat.
zuz...@webtv.net
zuz...@webtv.net
>closed interior door causes shredded
>carpet at its base.
Since you feel that your carpet is invariably more important than the
mental and physical welfare of a cat (not to mention the fact that you
did not do everything possible to give a cat entrusted to your care the
medication he so urgently needed), it would be in your cats' best
interests if you were to find them new homes.
There are many people on the cat groups that go to great lengths to
ensure the welfare of their cats without a second thought or concern
about what "may" happen to the carpet, or any other inanimate object for
that matter. That's what caring, compassionate and ethical people do.
Your placing the welfare of your precious carpet above that of a
stressed and sick cat, and especially one that your friend trusted that
you would care for, is insulting and your attitude does not bode well
for your cats' future if they remain with you.
Bob Brenchley.
<Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>
>>More like tight fisted.
>Only the guy who did it knows. By the time I bought the
>house he had died so only he knows what he did.
>
>Tight fisted is very common with those who lived
>through the great depression (1929).
Hohohohoho! Some people do like to blame the most stupid things.
--
Bob.
This sentence has exactly six words.
Bob Brenchley.
>Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>> On 27 Dec 2002 17:12:16 GMT, veru...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> >Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>
>(sniporama)
>
>> >
>> >Guess the UK hasn't discovered premium paints like Behr, which need
>> >little or no replacement if applied and primed properly. But Bob
>> >inherited his domicile from government housing anyway, so what does he
>> >know about long-term upkeep?
>>
>> You really do come out with some daft ideas Foot-Rot. [still, you will
>> never beat the lie about the ex SAS officer who became a Guardsman -
>> that was just the best tall story I ever heard.]
>
>You live in council (aka government-provided housing, aka "the projects" in
>the USA) housing. Period.
Nope.
>
>> >
>> >Plus, not everyone paints wood. After removing the paint from my home's
>> >oak mantel and skirtings in 1999, I applied several layers of shellac
>> >and finished off with traditional wax. They'll never need painting.
>> >Ever.
>>
>> No, but it will need stripping and retreating every ten or so years.
>> >
>
>One doesn't strip shellac unless one also enjoys stripping antiques.
>Shellac improves over the years - it's called "patina". However, you
>obviously don't know chit about painting, interior decor, antiques, or a
>shellac finish.
No? Just have a neighbour who is one of the best restorers in this
part of the country.
If YOU applied several layers of shellac then it will need redoing
fairly soon. In the meantime it will need constant polishing to keep
it in reasonable order.
Now if you had got an expert to do it, then it may have lasted a lot
longer, but it would still need redoing in time.
As for decorating, I do know that it is very boring to stick with the
same colour for more than a couple of years. But then we tent to take
pride in our homes over here.
>
>
>> >Considering Brainbox Bob's own lack of hygiene and slovenly personal
>> >upkeep as seen in pictures scattered round the Net, he isn't remotely
>> >qualified to talk about "good decorative order". He needs a personal
>> >trainer and a dentist pronto.
>>
>> Oh dear, your are on a lying fest today Foot-Rot. Maybe you are
>> thinking of yourself?
>
>I could always post an URL of your good self(again), who isn't the
>slightest bit embarrassed to attend a public meeting in a nasty gray track
>suit
Me? Wear a track suit? You must be kidding.
> and a filthy, untrimmed beard.
Not at all, very clean and trimmed exactly how I like it.
> Not to mention your lack of dental
>hygiene. Would you like that?
You are a very stupid little Foot-Rot. But then we got that message
the day you were daft enough to believe that anyone would fall for
that story about your ex-SAS squaddie who had dreams of being a
guardsman.
Back to your padded cell Foot-Rot - and keep taking the pills.
Bob Brenchley.
<tda...@gearbox.maem.umr.edu> wrote:
>On Fri, 27 Dec 2002 18:44:47 +0000, Bob Brenchley.
><B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 26 Dec 2002 19:40:36 -0600, Ted Davis
>><tda...@gearbox.maem.umr.edu> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 26 Dec 2002 16:50:53 +0000, Bob Brenchley.
>>><B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>The point is "what has the decorative state of the house to do with
>>>>the landlord?"
>>>
>>>Right off the bat, I can't think of a single person with an IQ above
>>>that of a cold room not understanding that landlords are interested in
>>>the bottom line, and the cost of painting (part of it anyway) comes
>>>out of the profit (and usually can to be done only while the house is
>>>empty).
>>
>>Talk about a MORON! First, it is rare for a landlord to be responsible
>>for decoration, except maybe the outside of the house. Second, where
>>the firking hell did you get the daft idea that you can only decorate
>>an empty house?
>
>I can't decide whether you really are totally ignorant of tenant
>behavior and legal liability, or whether you are just totally isolated
>from the real world.
None of the above.
>
>Imagine, if you will, that you own a rental unit somewhere in the US,
>and that is rented to a lawyer with an asthmatic child, a wife he
>throws around, a dog, and a cat. Now paint the interior while they
>are there.
Would not even think of it - not my responsibility, it would be the
responsibility of the tenant.
> Lawsuit #1: invasion of privacy
No, landlords would always have a right of reasonable entry.
> Lawsuit #2 (the big one): poisoning the child with the fumes
Oh come now, do you really claim that paint cannot be used near an
asthmatic child?
> Lawsuit #3: costs of replacing all the clothes damaged by bumping
>into (and being thrown into) the wet paint,
Now that is just about the silliest thing you have managed to post so
far.
> and the costs of clipping
>the animals
>
>Then you still have to repaint the interior because of all the smudges
>and embedded animal hairs.
Sorry, now that is just about the silliest thing you have managed to
post so far - you keep outdoing yourself.
>
>>
>>>Anytime I repaint a rental property, the property loses money
>>>for the year
>>
>>A 'YEAR' - bloody hell man do you paint it with an artist's brush? The
>>last time I had the outside of the house painted it took two days.
>>Inside I would allow three days per room if walls are painted, and
>>extra day for wallpaper. On an empty house (oh the luxury of being
>>able to have an empty house to do) I would say a week for a good job
>>with a normal team of decorators. Christ, we had new people move in
>>next door a couple of weeks ago and they redecorated all the
>>downstairs rooms in less than a week - and still went to work during
>>the day.
>
>The margin on rental property is not always very large, and one often
>has to hire this work done, especially me since it takes over twelve
>hours to get to the house by air and rental car.
So? A week's work and the jobs done. Freshly decorated house will be
easier to let as the tenants will know they don't need to fork out for
at least the first year.
>
>>
>>> - other landlords have similar situations. Only at the
>>>high rent for cheap property end of the scale is frequent repainting
>>>economically feasible (and since around here that is usually Section 8
>>>housing for welfare recipients, it may be done even less often).
>>
>>Round here we have laws to stop cowboy landlords like you.
>
>I wonder if I can sue you from here - that, along with many other of
>your nasty remarks - is totally uncalled for,
No it isn't. Slum landlords tend to get a bad time in the UK. The
courts will make sure that landlords do what is required of them -
though interior decorating would not be on that list.
>and completely
>unfounded.
You gave the grounds for it yourself.
> As a matter of fact, I have instructed my agent to
>carefully select the tenants within the limits of the equal
>opportunity laws to keep out the riff-raff.
It is not the tenants we are talking about - it is you being too tight
to spend money on your property.
Bob Brenchley.
<Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>
>>Because they were too tight fisted to spend money on decorating their
>>home.
>And if they lived through the great depression they didn't
>spend unless they had to. Try reading up on the great
>depression (1929) sometime to understand the mindset.
Oh I've spoken to many who went through it, and were glad to have the
modern standard of living that allows them to have good clothes, good
food, and a well decorated house.
--
Bob.
Artificial intelligence is no match for your natural stupidity.
Bob Brenchley.
<Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>
>>A house that does not get pained at regular intervals is not being
>>looked after.
>Not everyone lives at home with rich parents like you do.
You don't have to be rich to paint your house.
Bob Brenchley.
<Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>
>>As I said, I hope you got the house at a bargain price because one as
>>neglected as that will have a lot of problems to sort out.
>The house was definitely not neglected.
As I said, I hope you got the house at a bargain price because one as
neglected as that will have a lot of problems to sort out.
--
Bob Brenchley.
<Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>
>>>The house was definetly not neglected.
>>
>>If you believe that then you are a total moron.
>Just because it is old does not mean it was neglected.
As I said, I hope you got the house at a bargain price because one as
neglected as that will have a lot of problems to sort out.
--
Bob Brenchley.
<ernie...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 27 Dec 2002 18:46:54 +0000, Bob Brenchley.
><B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 26 Dec 2002 15:54:57 -0500, Willow Rosenberg
>><Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On the walls??? Since when has lead paint been used on walls???
>>>Around here all paint as late as the 50s was lead paint.
>>
>>
>>Hohohohoho!!! Pull the other one - its got bells on.
>
>_All_ paint wasn't lead paint, of course, but lead paint definitely
>common until 1950.
True, most gloss paints contained lead well into the 70s. However,
from the 40s on the amount of lead was greatly reduced because lead
was expensive and other cheaper chemicals were found that could do the
job. The real exception to this was, I'm told, white primer, which
took longer to find a replacement than any other type.
On the other hand, water based emulsion paints never used lead.
Thanks for the input though.
--
Bob.
The best car safety device? A rear-view mirror with a cop in it.
Willow Rosenberg
here, it is a fact of life. Who cares about the details.
The lead paint is there, I really don't care
when it got there, why it got there, and why it is
still there.
Of course BB doesn't have to worry about it, he
lives in Mommy and Daddy's basement in a house
that was probably built two months ago.
BB has probably never ventured out into the
real world where us plain folks have to buy
regular houses and rent regular aparments.
Willow Rosenberg
>Oh I've spoken to many who went through it, and were glad to have the
>modern standard of living that allows them to have good clothes, good
>food, and a well decorated house.
I know many who lived through the great depression and as
a result sill distrust banks, won't use a phone if it
connects to an answering machine, etc. I have one
neighbor who is is 97 years old, hates answering machines,
won't use a microwave, still keeps the car her husband drove
before he died (even though she has no license). When she
pays bills she gets money orders from the local conveniene
store. At 97 years old she is very set in her ways,
nobody is going to change her mind. Of course at 97
she is in better health than many in their 50s.
Willow Rosenberg
>You don't have to be rich to paint your house.
Of course you don't have to be rich because mom and
dad buy your paint for you.
Willow Rosenberg
>As I said, I hope you got the house at a bargain price because one as
>neglected as that will have a lot of problems to sort out.
When I sold it there were no problems. Passed inspection
with flying colors.
Willow Rosenberg
>As I said, I hope you got the house at a bargain price because one as
>neglected as that will have a lot of problems to sort out.
Then how come it sold for alot more than what I paid for it
and it passed inspection with flying colors?
Ted Davis
>>Not feasible: I like my carpet, and a
>>closed interior door causes shredded
>>carpet at its base.
>
>Since you feel that your carpet is invariably more important than the
>mental and physical welfare of a cat (not to mention the fact that you
>did not do everything possible to give a cat entrusted to your care the
>medication he so urgently needed), it would be in your cats' best
>interests if you were to find them new homes.
*My* cats don't try to bite me when I try to handle them to give them
medicine - or any other time, except perhaps when they are stressed
out from just joining the family or for some months if they were wild
when I got them. Jose was stressed out and was quite hostile. I
didn't want to keep him, and it was a considerable inconvenience, but
I have a hard time saying no to people I like, even when they want me
to do something I know shouldn't be done at all - Tracy should have
stayed home with the cat, but the only option she would consider was
taking him with her and leaving him in his carrier in her truck for
several cold days. I figured he would at least be warm here, and she
told me he tolerated other cats very well (he didn't).
>
>There are many people on the cat groups that go to great lengths to
>ensure the welfare of their cats without a second thought or concern
>about what "may" happen to the carpet, or any other inanimate object for
>that matter. That's what caring, compassionate and ethical people do.
>Your placing the welfare of your precious carpet above that of a
>stressed and sick cat, and especially one that your friend trusted that
>you would care for, is insulting and your attitude does not bode well
>for your cats' future if they remain with you.
Because of the large gaps at the bottoms of the doors, when the carpet
has been clawed away from the doorway, some of the smaller cats could
get under the door. Jose is too big to have gotten out that way, but
several of mine are small enough to get in that way, and one of those
doesn't like new cats for a couple of weeks and, while I don't think
she would attack one under ordinary conditions, I am *highly*
unwilling to let her get into an enclosed area with no easy exit with
an already stressed out cat.
Ted Davis
<B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
ROTFLMAO - then the landlord has to pay to cover up the tenant's
choice of colors that destroyed the rental market value of the house.
Since that might involve strange dark colors, rather than the neutral
light ones that preserve the property's value, it could easily take
several coats, at much more cost than doing in right would have. Only
an idiot lets tenants paint the house unless they have a *long* lease
with heavy penalty clauses for early termination. My properties are
rented on a month to month basis, as is customary in the area where
it's located.
>
>> Lawsuit #1: invasion of privacy
>
>No, landlords would always have a right of reasonable entry.
>
>> Lawsuit #2 (the big one): poisoning the child with the fumes
>
>Oh come now, do you really claim that paint cannot be used near an
>asthmatic child?
>
>> Lawsuit #3: costs of replacing all the clothes damaged by bumping
>>into (and being thrown into) the wet paint,
>
>Now that is just about the silliest thing you have managed to post so
>far.
>
>> and the costs of clipping
>>the animals
>>
>>Then you still have to repaint the interior because of all the smudges
>>and embedded animal hairs.
>
>Sorry, now that is just about the silliest thing you have managed to
>post so far - you keep outdoing yourself.
Silly? Worse things happen all the time - American landlords have to
be extremely careful not to give the tenants an opportunity to sue,
for much the same reasons you can't get really hot coffee in fast food
places any more: way too many lawyers and way too many people looking
for ways to grab an easy buck by suing someone.
>>
>>>
>>>>Anytime I repaint a rental property, the property loses money
>>>>for the year
>>>
>>>A 'YEAR' - bloody hell man do you paint it with an artist's brush? The
>>>last time I had the outside of the house painted it took two days.
>>>Inside I would allow three days per room if walls are painted, and
>>>extra day for wallpaper. On an empty house (oh the luxury of being
>>>able to have an empty house to do) I would say a week for a good job
>>>with a normal team of decorators. Christ, we had new people move in
>>>next door a couple of weeks ago and they redecorated all the
>>>downstairs rooms in less than a week - and still went to work during
>>>the day.
>>
>>The margin on rental property is not always very large, and one often
>>has to hire this work done, especially me since it takes over twelve
>>hours to get to the house by air and rental car.
>
>So? A week's work and the jobs done. Freshly decorated house will be
>easier to let as the tenants will know they don't need to fork out for
>at least the first year.
It's cheaper to hire it done than to travel there - not counting my
lost wages or wasted vacation time.
>>
>>>
>>>> - other landlords have similar situations. Only at the
>>>>high rent for cheap property end of the scale is frequent repainting
>>>>economically feasible (and since around here that is usually Section 8
>>>>housing for welfare recipients, it may be done even less often).
>>>
>>>Round here we have laws to stop cowboy landlords like you.
>>
>>I wonder if I can sue you from here - that, along with many other of
>>your nasty remarks - is totally uncalled for,
>
>No it isn't. Slum landlords tend to get a bad time in the UK. The
>courts will make sure that landlords do what is required of them -
>though interior decorating would not be on that list.
>
>>and completely
>>unfounded.
>
I'm not a slumlord - never have been; never will be. The house is a
nice one - the largest on that side of the street for several blocks -
in an old but still respectable middle class neighborhood
>You gave the grounds for it yourself.
>
>> As a matter of fact, I have instructed my agent to
>>carefully select the tenants within the limits of the equal
>>opportunity laws to keep out the riff-raff.
>
>It is not the tenants we are talking about - it is you being too tight
>to spend money on your property.
I spent half it's market value in the first two years I owned it on
repairs and such: complete rewiring, new roof, new floor in the den,
new HVAC system, exterior trim repair and painting, etc.
Ted Davis
<Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Why are we even bothering with this debate? Lead paint is
>here, it is a fact of life. Who cares about the details.
>The lead paint is there, I really don't care
>when it got there, why it got there, and why it is
>still there.
It's not a discussion - it's an exercise in Brenchley baiting. It's a
diversion for a snowed in time. But the country roads should be clear
now and I'm losing interest.
Never fear though, he'll say something stupid and abusive again soon
enough, and provide another opportunity for a bit of recreation which
I'll pick up on if I'm in the mood and have the time.
I play the straight man to his village idiot.
Bob Brenchley.
>Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>> On 28 Dec 2002 04:07:23 GMT, veru...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> >Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>> >> On 27 Dec 2002 17:12:16 GMT, veru...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >(sniporama)
>> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Guess the UK hasn't discovered premium paints like Behr, which need
>> >> >little or no replacement if applied and primed properly. But Bob
>> >> >inherited his domicile from government housing anyway, so what does
>> >> >he know about long-term upkeep?
>> >>
>> >> You really do come out with some daft ideas Foot-Rot. [still, you will
>> >> never beat the lie about the ex SAS officer who became a Guardsman -
>> >> that was just the best tall story I ever heard.]
>> >
>> >You live in council (aka government-provided housing, aka "the projects"
>> >in the USA) housing. Period.
>>
>> Nope.
>
>Sorry, the front door is a dead giveaway.
I'm sure you think you are making sense - but rest assured you are
not.
>
>> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Plus, not everyone paints wood. After removing the paint from my
>> >> >home's oak mantel and skirtings in 1999, I applied several layers of
>> >> >shellac and finished off with traditional wax. They'll never need
>> >> >painting. Ever.
>> >>
>> >> No, but it will need stripping and retreating every ten or so years.
>
>No, you simply reapply your choice of colored or clear wax, stupid. Try
>contacting Briwax for more info.
And so the wax builds up and fogs....
True, some like that look, just as some seem to like the slum look of
50 year old paint.
>
>> >
>> >One doesn't strip shellac unless one also enjoys stripping antiques.
>> >Shellac improves over the years - it's called "patina". However, you
>> >obviously don't know chit about painting, interior decor, antiques, or a
>> >shellac finish.
>>
>> No? Just have a neighbour who is one of the best restorers in this
>> part of the country.
>
>So what? How about you send me his name and number and I'll call him for a
>chat. I'm about to redo the fireplace mantel.
Ah! So it did need redoing after just a few years - point proven.
>
>>
>> If YOU applied several layers of shellac then it will need redoing
>> fairly soon.
>
>Actually I've taken classes in antique restoration. The shellac was
>applied with a rubber by hand. Took a while, but it will last for decades.
And how many days did it take? Or should we say how many weeks....
>
>>In the meantime it will need constant polishing to keep
>> it in reasonable order.
>
>Constant polishing? With what? Nonsense. I don't serve dinner on my
>skirting boards, so they rarely need a new coat of Briwax.
Ah! So you don't understand how polish works.
>
>>
>> Now if you had got an expert to do it, then it may have lasted a lot
>> longer, but it would still need redoing in time.
>
>Sorry, honey, but this is something I know more about than you.
There is nothing you know more about than me - with the single
exception of lying on newsgroups - at that you are so far ahead I
would need the Hubble telescope to even stand a chance of seeing you.
>>
>> As for decorating, I do know that it is very boring to stick with the
>> same colour for more than a couple of years.
>
>I prefer the natural beauty of wood to chintzy wallpapers or the paint
>trend of the month. Painted areas of my home were decided largely by the
>psychological effect of certain colors.
>
>> But then we tent to take
>> pride in our homes over here.
>
>BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Even your own TV shows parody the unimaginative decor of
>the average UK council flat.
Yes, parody.
>
>You might want to check out www.ambungalow.com for some examples of my
>home's style.
>
>(snip for brevity's sake)
>
>>
>> Me? Wear a track suit? You must be kidding.
>
>So all your trousers have visible drawstrings at the waist? See:
As I said, "Me? Wear a track suit? You must be kidding."
>
>http://mnemotech.ucam.org/showpics98.html
>
>(BTW, I can't help but wonder who pixelated your face here.)
>
>>
>> > and a filthy, untrimmed beard.
>>
>> Not at all, very clean and trimmed exactly how I like it.
>
>Trimmed? BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
>
>http://www.thehobbitsburrow.org.uk/boinks/coventry_photos/dunno2.jpg
>
>Game over. New balls, please.
Yes, trimmed.
Bob Brenchley.
<tda...@gearbox.maem.umr.edu> wrote:
>On Sat, 28 Dec 2002 18:49:20 -0500, Willow Rosenberg
><Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Why are we even bothering with this debate? Lead paint is
>>here, it is a fact of life. Who cares about the details.
>>The lead paint is there, I really don't care
>>when it got there, why it got there, and why it is
>>still there.
>
>It's not a discussion - it's an exercise in Brenchley baiting.
And one you have lost.
>It's a
>diversion for a snowed in time. But the country roads should be clear
>now and I'm losing interest.
>
>Never fear though, he'll say something stupid and abusive again soon
>enough, and provide another opportunity for a bit of recreation which
>I'll pick up on if I'm in the mood and have the time.
>
>I play the straight man to his village idiot.
--
Bob Brenchley.
>Ted Davis <tda...@gearbox.maem.umr.edu> wrote:
>> On Sat, 28 Dec 2002 18:49:20 -0500, Willow Rosenberg
>> <Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Why are we even bothering with this debate? Lead paint is
>> >here, it is a fact of life. Who cares about the details.
>> >The lead paint is there, I really don't care
>> >when it got there, why it got there, and why it is
>> >still there.
>>
>> It's not a discussion - it's an exercise in Brenchley baiting. It's a
>> diversion for a snowed in time. But the country roads should be clear
>> now and I'm losing interest.
>>
>> Never fear though, he'll say something stupid and abusive again soon
>> enough, and provide another opportunity for a bit of recreation which
>> I'll pick up on if I'm in the mood and have the time.
>
>Same here. I suppose we shouldn't be cruel to someone with a major
>personality disorder, but hey, nobody's forcing Brainbox Bob to post.
>
>You might want to check out the uk.legal archives; posters there have
>administered some wonderful spankings
In your sick dreams Foot-Rot, only in your very sick dreams. As a long
standing contributor to several of the legal groups I'm quite able to
deal with the trolls.
> in addition to giving Bob the
>"Brainbox" prefix.
At least I have a brain - if only the same could be said of you.
--
Bob.
If brains were taxed, you would get a rebate.
Bob Brenchley.
>Willow Rosenberg <Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Why are we even bothering with this debate? Lead paint is
>> here, it is a fact of life. Who cares about the details.
>> The lead paint is there, I really don't care
>> when it got there, why it got there, and why it is
>> still there.
>>
>> Of course BB doesn't have to worry about it, he
>> lives in Mommy and Daddy's basement in a house
>> that was probably built two months ago.
>
>Actually the UK government gave him accommodation. See "council housing".
Liar!
Oh, and the UK government has no housing, well except that provided
for squaddies by the MOD.
>
>>
>> BB has probably never ventured out into the
>> real world where us plain folks have to buy
>> regular houses and rent regular aparments.
>
>Thank goodness he doesn't travel overseas.
You somehow manage to get more stupid with every passing lie.
--
Bob.
She's depriving a village somewhere of an idiot.
Bob Brenchley.
<tda...@gearbox.maem.umr.edu> wrote:
>>
>>Would not even think of it - not my responsibility, it would be the
>>responsibility of the tenant.
>
>ROTFLMAO - then the landlord has to pay to cover up the tenant's
>choice of colors that destroyed the rental market value of the house.
Where do you get daft ideas like that from?
>Since that might involve strange dark colors, rather than the neutral
>light ones that preserve the property's value, it could easily take
>several coats, at much more cost than doing in right would have. Only
>an idiot lets tenants paint the house
Sorry moron, but tenants have the legal right to live in their choice
of colours.
> unless they have a *long* lease
>with heavy penalty clauses for early termination. My properties are
>rented on a month to month basis, as is customary in the area where
>it's located.
Ah! Another proof that you are one of the cowboy landlords.
>
>>
>>> Lawsuit #1: invasion of privacy
>>
>>No, landlords would always have a right of reasonable entry.
>>
>>> Lawsuit #2 (the big one): poisoning the child with the fumes
>>
>>Oh come now, do you really claim that paint cannot be used near an
>>asthmatic child?
>>
>>> Lawsuit #3: costs of replacing all the clothes damaged by bumping
>>>into (and being thrown into) the wet paint,
>>
>>Now that is just about the silliest thing you have managed to post so
>>far.
>>
>>> and the costs of clipping
>>>the animals
>>>
>>>Then you still have to repaint the interior because of all the smudges
>>>and embedded animal hairs.
>>
>>Sorry, now that is just about the silliest thing you have managed to
>>post so far - you keep outdoing yourself.
>
>Silly? Worse things happen all the time - American landlords have to
>be extremely careful not to give the tenants an opportunity to sue,
Sue for what?
>for much the same reasons you can't get really hot coffee in fast food
>places any more: way too many lawyers and way too many people looking
>for ways to grab an easy buck by suing someone.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Anytime I repaint a rental property, the property loses money
>>>>>for the year
>>>>
>>>>A 'YEAR' - bloody hell man do you paint it with an artist's brush? The
>>>>last time I had the outside of the house painted it took two days.
>>>>Inside I would allow three days per room if walls are painted, and
>>>>extra day for wallpaper. On an empty house (oh the luxury of being
>>>>able to have an empty house to do) I would say a week for a good job
>>>>with a normal team of decorators. Christ, we had new people move in
>>>>next door a couple of weeks ago and they redecorated all the
>>>>downstairs rooms in less than a week - and still went to work during
>>>>the day.
>>>
>>>The margin on rental property is not always very large, and one often
>>>has to hire this work done, especially me since it takes over twelve
>>>hours to get to the house by air and rental car.
>>
>>So? A week's work and the jobs done. Freshly decorated house will be
>>easier to let as the tenants will know they don't need to fork out for
>>at least the first year.
>
>It's cheaper to hire it done than to travel there - not counting my
>lost wages or wasted vacation time.
So? My comment still applies regardless.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> - other landlords have similar situations. Only at the
>>>>>high rent for cheap property end of the scale is frequent repainting
>>>>>economically feasible (and since around here that is usually Section 8
>>>>>housing for welfare recipients, it may be done even less often).
>>>>
>>>>Round here we have laws to stop cowboy landlords like you.
>>>
>>>I wonder if I can sue you from here - that, along with many other of
>>>your nasty remarks - is totally uncalled for,
>>
>>No it isn't. Slum landlords tend to get a bad time in the UK. The
>>courts will make sure that landlords do what is required of them -
>>though interior decorating would not be on that list.
>>
>>>and completely
>>>unfounded.
>>
>I'm not a slumlord - never have been; never will be. The house is a
>nice one - the largest on that side of the street for several blocks -
>in an old but still respectable middle class neighborhood
A house that has not been painted in the last ten years would count as
a slum. Houses need regular maintenance.
>
>>You gave the grounds for it yourself.
>>
>>> As a matter of fact, I have instructed my agent to
>>>carefully select the tenants within the limits of the equal
>>>opportunity laws to keep out the riff-raff.
>>
>>It is not the tenants we are talking about - it is you being too tight
>>to spend money on your property.
>
>I spent half it's market value in the first two years I owned it on
>repairs and such: complete rewiring, new roof, new floor in the den,
>new HVAC system, exterior trim repair and painting, etc.
And what is your annual budget for maintenance now?
--
Bob.
I see you've set aside this special time to humiliate yourself in
public.
Bob Brenchley.
<Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>
>>Oh I've spoken to many who went through it, and were glad to have the
>>modern standard of living that allows them to have good clothes, good
>>food, and a well decorated house.
>I know many who lived through the great depression and as
>a result sill distrust banks, won't use a phone if it
>connects to an answering machine, etc. I have one
>neighbor who is is 97 years old, hates answering machines,
>won't use a microwave, still keeps the car her husband drove
>before he died (even though she has no license). When she
>pays bills she gets money orders from the local conveniene
>store. At 97 years old she is very set in her ways,
>nobody is going to change her mind. Of course at 97
>she is in better health than many in their 50s.
I've got friends and relatives in the 80s who use computers (email is
so good for keeping in touch with the modern families that spread
across several continents) could not live without their phones
(several even have mobiles these days) and at least two still drive a
lot.
People who lived through the depression and war years are only too
glad to have the luxury and convenience of modern life.
--
Bob.
Education would be you best defense, at the moment you are totally
defenseless.
Bob Brenchley.
<Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>
>>You don't have to be rich to paint your house.
>Of course you don't have to be rich because mom and
>dad buy your paint for you.
Paint is very cheap. does wonders to brighten up a home - you should
try it.
Bob Brenchley.
<Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>
>>As I said, I hope you got the house at a bargain price because one as
>>neglected as that will have a lot of problems to sort out.
>When I sold it there were no problems. Passed inspection
>with flying colors.
>
As I said, I hope you got the house at a bargain price because one as
neglected as that will have a lot of problems to sort out.
--
Bob Brenchley.
<Willow___Ros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Bob Brenchley. <B...@format.publications.ukf.net> wrote:
>
>>As I said, I hope you got the house at a bargain price because one as
>>neglected as that will have a lot of problems to sort out.
>Then how come it sold for alot more than what I paid for it
>and it passed inspection with flying colors?
>
As I said, I hope you got the house at a bargain price because one as
neglected as that will have a lot of problems to sort out.
--
Bob.
If aliens are smart enough to travel through space, why do they
keep abducting the dumbest people on earth?
Sherry
>
>Sorry moron, but tenants have the legal right to live in their choice
>of colours.
>
Cite the statute, please.
Willow Rosenberg
>Where do you get daft ideas like that from?
From tenants who paint the walls purple or some other
odd color.
Willow Rosenberg
>Sorry moron, but tenants have the legal right to live in their choice
>of colours.
But when the landlord owns the property the tenant doesn't
have the right to paint odd colors like day glow orange.
Around here the landlord has to approve the
choice of colors.
Willow Rosenberg
>And what is your annual budget for maintenance now?
Of course BB spends $0.00 on maintenance.....he
has mom and dad to pay for it.