Nice People Thread Part 9 - and so it continues

neverdespairgirl

chewmylegoff wrote: »

I reckon the correct approach is to wait until you're 34 to consider buying a house. Prior to that you should concentrate on getting drunk.

I was 33 - is that an NP fail? not enough alcohol?

silvercar wrote: »

For clarity, I should add that we had neither the living at home rent free in London or the offer of help from parents to do this. Though pooling resources and buying together meant we could afford a 2 bed between us - not that we ever let out the spare room.

I could have lived with my parents, but didn't, I lived with OH instead (-:

Isaac is a lot more expensive than a house - his nanny + school fees together are considerably more than the mortgage. But he's more responsive than a brick wall, and more fun, too.

vivatifosi wrote: »

I had tests a few months back and it was a similar experience. I needed an ultrasound on my groin to see whether there was something more to my hip problems. In the letter, the main request was that we didn't drink beforehand and emptied our bladder. If you didn't do that, you may need an internal ultrasound instead (which surely isn't something you would do without having to).

When i had a pregnancy ultrasound, the instruction was the opposite - drink as much as possible, as a full bladder makes the scan better.

Trouble is, having a full bladder, a baby in your stomach and someone pressing hard on it means all you can think about is when you can get to the loo, and it makes it difficult to concentrate on the baby waving at you.

michaels

I have been very remiss at finding time to reply to people's newes...and I will continue to be until this evening as I am at work. However I will share some of my news, the planner said 'no'

bugslet

Planner is obviously a moron with no vision.

Hope that makes you feel a little better;)

SingleSue

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

Is that the private uni, or am I thinking of somewhere else?

Does he know yet what actual grades he got in his A levels?

Nope not the private one, my second cousin goes there...expensive! :eek:

He is going to Bucks New Uni http://bucks.ac.uk/

He does know his results now and is very pleased with them as he exceeded the predicted, one by a huge amount. A bit bitter sweet really as one of his Uni offers was quite high points and he discounted it as being out of reach, yet he actually got the points they had requested...and it had been his favourite choice during his GCSEs.

But he is happy with his choice, even though I really fancied Portsmouth which was even less points required than the one he finally accepted. Herts (his first choice at the start of A levels and then again after NUCA was discounted), was gutting, he got offered a place, the points were right but the take up (or politics) wasn't and they changed the course to something he didn't really want.

So that is one steered successfully through, two more to go but possibly more of a battle. Middle son is a little resistant to going to university at the moment because of the change required and youngest, although bright enough (he is insanely bright), is struggling with school putting his GCSEs in jeopardy.

michaels

bugslet wrote: »

Planner is obviously a moron with no vision.

Hope that makes you feel a little better;)

No actually - he has dismissed most of the ugly jealously in 8 of the 9 complaints and merely taken a different view in interpreting the one issue that may actually be relevant. (Hopefully not connected to one of the objectors being chairman of the local cricket club and no doubt the others being of simialr local 'importance')

However this makes it very difficult for me to know whether to proceed in the expectation of success with some amendments or abandon on the grounds that it is never going to happen. the architects 'solution' is to spend even more money on a planning consultant which of course involves investing even more money in somethign that make come to nothing. Shame Doozer is not around as she is probably quite experienced in reading between the lines of planner speak.

Nikkster

michaels wrote: »

No actually - he has dismissed most of the ugly jealously in 8 of the 9 complaints and merely taken a different view in interpreting the one issue that may actually be relevant. (Hopefully not connected to one of the objectors being chairman of the local cricket club and no doubt the others being of simialr local 'importance')

However this makes it very difficult for me to know whether to proceed in the expectation of success with some amendments or abandon on the grounds that it is never going to happen. the architects 'solution' is to spend even more money on a planning consultant which of course involves investing even more money in somethign that make come to nothing. Shame Doozer is not around as she is probably quite experienced in reading between the lines of planner speak.

Sorry to hear that Michaels.

I might know someone who could help you - will send you a pm this evening when I'm at sitting in front of a computer at home rather than at work

michaels

Nikkster wrote: »

Sorry to hear that Michaels.

I might know someone who could help you - will send you a pm this evening when I'm at sitting in front of a computer at home rather than at work

Thanks, I'll let you knwo when I have had a chance to clear my PM box then you need to get in quick before someone fills it up again.....

Nikkster

michaels wrote: »

Thanks, I'll let you knwo when I have had a chance to clear my PM box then you need to get in quick before someone fills it up again.....

I can always drop you an email

neverdespairgirl

michaels wrote: »

I have been very remiss at finding time to reply to people's newes...and I will continue to be until this evening as I am at work. However I will share some of my news, the planner said 'no'

Did he give reasons? Are you thinking of changing it a bit and resubmitting? Or might you appeal?

michaels

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

Did he give reasons? Are you thinking of changing it a bit and resubmitting? Or might you appeal?

Yes - the planning officer applied two rules which my architect claims are not relevant in this instance, our arguements were presented in the application but he did not adress our arguements in his decision. He also made no referece to the similar site where permission has been granted which we quoted as precident. the architect of course suggests spending more money to get an expert opinion and then probably more again with amended plans but then his interests and mine are not entirely aligned....

The planning officer did slightly annoy me by suggesting we should have gone with a pre-application discussion - well I did go and talk to a planning officer who was non-commital in the free session but suggested I go for a paid session, which I paid for but then after hearing nothing for 3 weeks I decided I could wait no longer (for a meeting that would probably result in a conclusion couched in 'maybes') and submitted a full application. I have still heard nothing about the paid for pe-app meeting but they have not returned the 250 fee I paid for the meeting which they promised to do when I submitted the full app!