Nice people thread part 8 - worth the wait

fc123

Generali wrote: »

TBH, I'd be inclined to say something along the lines of, "either we do this properly or not at all".

....he doesn't seem to know what doing it 'properly' means sadly.

GDB2222 wrote: »

There's no problem paying in cash, money-laundering excepted, but the documentation (eg the TR1 form) will need to reflect the true amount paid. Otherwise, FC will be involved in fraud. There is a clause in the TR1 to say "The transferor has received from the transferee for the property the following sum (in words and figures): ", and is FC really going to sign a false declaration?

Similarly, the SDLT1 form asks "Is this transaction linked to any other(s)?"

So, it is not possible to side-step the fraud and leave the vendor to it, even if you want to.

It is legitimate to buy the furniture, appliances, garden shed, pot plants, (removable) carpets and curtains as a separate cash deal at a realistic value. I guess this might save the vendor a smidgeon of tax if he chooses not to declare it, and such transactions can legitimately be for cash.

At the end of the day, you can't force him to sell to you, and he can't force you to do anything illegal. So, accommodate him as much as you can whilst staying within the law, and that defines your boundary that you don't step over.

vivatifosi wrote: »

I'd tell him that he has zero chance of me handing over a carrier bag of my hard earned without a receipt and to get used to the fact that you'll be using a solicitor.

If he threatens to pull out so what? Ultimately fc you hold all the cards as if he's not 100% stupid he'll know that you can go to the tax authority and tell on his not so cunning plan.

.....all good points affirming what we already feel instinctively.

The good news is that the last tenant, who has been so difficult and is a ....um....volatile character, has agreed to take £200 cash from the vendor to move out in an orderly fashion....with the condition that he doesn't trash the place more than he already has done....just with his day to day living habits.


However, I am getting a bit of cold feet/nerves as we will be wiped out for a while and makes me feel insecure. You know, the safety net all shoved into an 'illiquid asset' (Generali used to say that a lot back in 2009).

Just got to decide whether to bu it in a Ltd company or as an individual or as a couple.....should have decided sooner but I still can't work out what would be best.....as sums wise it's a bit swings and roundabouts all told.

fc123

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

I've been doing that with my eyes. I bought an eye cream that is supposed to stop me looking 35 and make me look about 3 months old (apparently) and for the past month, been applying it to one eye, and leaving the other one alone.

They look identical, to me. So I still look 35, which doesn't actually bother me at all, I don't know why I paid £ludicrous in the first place.

That's a really good idea.
I got conned into buying a 'guaranteed' look 10 years younger one recently from Boots and no-one has said anything like 'o my FC you look 10 years younger!''....but I might test it to see by doing half the face for a month.

silvercar

We're short of all of those - my parents have a brother each, but neither has children, so the 4 of us were the only grandchildren on either side.

My Dad had one sibling, my Mum has two. Same for OH.

I have 8 first cousins, OH has 6.

Our kids have 7 first cousins, 23 second cousins.

silvercar

Just got to decide whether to bu it in a Ltd company or as an individual or as a couple.....should have decided sooner but I still can't work out what would be best.....as sums wise it's a bit swings and roundabouts all told.

Are you getting a mortgage? If so, will the lender lend to a company? Could be the deciding factor.

fc123

silvercar wrote: »

Are you getting a mortgage? If so, will the lender lend to a company? Could be the deciding factor.

No mortgage but I don't like to decide based on current tax rules as they can always change.

The decider is that it will run mainly as business for about 10 years and there is a lot of renovation to do.....so doing that as being VAT reg'd would be advantageous (assuming you can reclaim VAT on the renovation). I only know about VAT etc in my current set up.

LydiaJ

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

We're short of all of those - my parents have a brother each, but neither has children, so the 4 of us were the only grandchildren on either side. I don't, therefore, have any first cousins. Dearly beloved didn't either, when we got together, but when Isaac was 3, his uncle (then aged about 52) and his wife (not much younger) had twins via IVF, so OH does have cousins now, albeit younger than his own son.

Isaac doesn't have any cousins yet; my sisters and Bruv are all childless, and so is OH's brother.

My darling Mama was saying at CHristmas that, with 4 children, she'd thought she might have more than 1 grandchild by now (my sisters are nearly 33 and nearly 29, and my brother's 27). I told her I'd done my bit, she should harrass the others.

Ah well then, the similarity between us ends there. I have excessive numbers of cousins:

On my dad's side, I have 11 first cousins, who have between them produced 20 kids (my first cousins once removed) and 4 grandkids so far. I also have numerous second cousins on that side - my dad's grandmother was a matriarch who had 12 children and expected them all to visit frequently, so consequently my dad and his sister grew up to be close to their cousins, and we still see them and their descendents at weddings and funerals and 90th birthdays and similar occasions.

On my mum's side, I have 5 full first cousins, who've had (I think) about 6 or 7 kids between them, but they're all over the other side of the world so we don't see much of them. I also have 4 half first cousins (the children of my mum's half-sister) who've had 10 kids (my half first cousins once removed) and some unknown number of grandkids.

Meanwhile, I have 2 kids, 4 nephews and a niece, so that makes 7 grandkids for my dad. He won't be getting any more, though, judging by the ages of myself and my sisters-in-law.

LNE was an only child. He had 6 cousins, of whom I met 4 when we were together. We still see his parents, but not his wider family, I'm afraid.

ETA: Any NP wishing to see a pic of my new shelves can find one "elsewhere".

dryhat

The other day, my missus said she wished she had a bigger bust.

So I told her to get some toilet paper and rub it along her cleavage.

She said "that won't work will it?"

I said "well, it's worked on your 4rse"


BOOM BOOM


(sorry, I'm a bit drunk)

neverdespairgirl

The old jokes are the.....

old jokes.

PasturesNew

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

I bought an eye cream that is supposed to stop me looking 35

I don't need cream for that. I don't look 35.

neverdespairgirl

LydiaJ wrote: »

snips list of incredible numbers of relatives

My Dad had lots of first cousins - well, he still does! His mother was the youngest of 5 sisters, of whom 4 married and had between 2 and 5 children each. Until his grandmother died when Dad was 12, they all decamped to Granny's house every Christmas. It was, I gather, a crowded experience!

Dad's mother was the youngest (born in 1913), and the eldest had been born in 1899. As well as the obvious age difference between the children of the sisters, Dad and his brother's arrival was held up by the Second World War, as his parents met before it but didn't have children until after.

Dad's first cousins' children were therefore, on the whole, much closer to him in age than the first cousins themselves. One, who we see more often than most of them as she lives not far from my parents' place in Kent, is only a couple of years younger than him, although technically she is a generation younger IYSWIM.