Nice People Thread Number 10 -the official residence of Nice People

LydiaJ

silvercar wrote: »

You can put on a new computer if it was on an old machine that you have dumped, without the need to phone up and explain. I heard that the software only checks the number of machines you have installed on if the last install was within the last 6 months, but that could be urban myth.

Let's hope I can find the discs then.

silvercar

I have a feeling they also let it for a year or so in the early 60s, but I wasn't around, so I'm a bit hazy on the details. He will want to declare anything that ought to be declared as a point of principle - he's like that. He'll have used up at least some of hiis CGT allowance, but I've no idea how much. However, according to the division of labour between the four of us, helping him with that kind of thing is the responsibility of my eldest brother. I have other responsibilities - internet banking, for example, also visiting him more frequently than anyone else can manage, and a few other things.

His principles will reduce the tax, which is why they may ask for proof of rental.

By the way, the starting point for calculating the gain is its value on 31 March 1982 if it was owned before that date.

LydiaJ

silvercar wrote: »

His principles will reduce the tax, which is why they may ask for proof of rental.

By the way, the starting point for calculating the gain is its value on 31 March 1982 if it was owned before that date.

In that case he probably won't declare it. I thought having let it would mean it hadn't been his PPR for the whole time and therefore increase the tax. If decreasing his tax liability involves a whole lot of hassle and attempting to find paperwork from 30 years ago, he'll just pay the extra.

I've no idea what it was worth in 1982, but presumably there are ways of calculating these things. Anyway, you've all reassured me that whatever happens he isn't going to get stung for hundreds of thousands of pounds of CGT, so I'm happy. I'll leave the rest of it to my brother to sort out, when we get to that stage, which we haven't quite yet.

chewmylegoff

Another offer has been made at asking price but that person has a house to sell and has no buyer in place at the moment. Have upped ours a bit and now we are only £7,500 below asking. Probably should have just matched the asking price... Ah well.

zagubov

Generali wrote: »

Quite cool? Amazing more like!

I'm a big fan of Richard Wiseman but I didn't know about this illusion website he got that image from


EDIT: DON"T CLICK IF YOU'RE PRONE TO MOTION SICKNESS OR EPILEPSY
http://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/~akitaoka/index-e.html

silvercar

zagubov wrote: »

I'm a big fan of Richard Wiseman but I didn't know about this illusion website he got that image from
http://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/~akitaoka/index-e.html
Worth a look!

Warning: This page contains some works of "anomalous motion illusion", which might make sensitive observers dizzy or sick. Should you feel dizzy, you had better leave this page immediately. More

Yup that was me!

Some of the pictures on this website can cause dizziness or might possibly epileptic seizures. The latter happens when the brain can't handle the conflicting information from your two eyes. If you start feeling unwell when using this website, immediately cover one eye with your hand and then leave the page. Do not close your eyes because that can make the attack worse.

Think you should warn people before they click.

I'm not epileptic, but it did make me feel dizzy.

lostinrates

silvercar wrote: »

Yup that was me!



Think you should warn people before they click.

I'm not epileptic, but it did make me feel dizzy.

Very relieved I didn't c,ick:eek:


Incidentally, I find the big tv definitely worse for my head etc than others and its probably psychosomatic but I think hd is worse. Than not hd.

silvercar

LydiaJ wrote: »

In that case he probably won't declare it. I thought having let it would mean it hadn't been his PPR for the whole time and therefore increase the tax. If decreasing his tax liability involves a whole lot of hassle and attempting to find paperwork from 30 years ago, he'll just pay the extra.

I've no idea what it was worth in 1982, but presumably there are ways of calculating these things. Anyway, you've all reassured me that whatever happens he isn't going to get stung for hundreds of thousands of pounds of CGT, so I'm happy. I'll leave the rest of it to my brother to sort out, when we get to that stage, which we haven't quite yet.

Having let a property that was your home gives you access to letting relief, that can give you a further allowance of up to £40k for the CGT.

zagubov

silvercar wrote: »

Yup that was me!



Think you should warn people before they click.

I'm not epileptic, but it did make me feel dizzy.

I've amended that post.

I never knew that non-moving pictures could trigger seizures. Is this a new finding? I know psychology courses use these kinds of images a lot.

lostinrates

zagubov wrote: »

I've amended that post.

I never knew that non-moving pictures could trigger seizures. Is this a new finding? I know psychology courses use these kinds of images a lot.

I don't have 'seizures ' TBC. I never have had. I realise in retrospect my post reads as of I am saying I might . The worst would happen to me is that I plonk on the floor for a second. more like
Y to get a headache, or even nothing.

I collapse and 'black out' but I do not 'fit'. In the same way as seizures might be related to migraines they might be related to my head pains and nerve pains. Flashing images can trigger pain for example. Other times they do not. I take anti seizure medication now, but only have since the vision thing. I don't know /remember atm whether I did earlier in this mess but I have a feeling I have done.