zeban

Just echoing dicey, LadyDeliah, Kid Kruger, ultrauk. I actually saw this thread last night and thought it's only 10pm on actual bonfire night and someone is already complaining!!!! stop moaning and chill out, the world doesn't change and shouldn't change just because you have a baby!!!

Totally agree with your entire post Plimsoul. Wish you would post more often to be honest!

Sounds good Otta. keep us updated. I like going out in Brixton.

No problem. I've made my point!

Bugaboo is a brand that has middle class connotations and associations attached to it. To ignore this when assessing the price of them is to be naive; to say they're expensive just because they're well designed is far too simplistic. They may well be well designed but the price tags of some of them- ?800-?1000 show that they are clearly targetting a certain type of person. I'm not saying all those who buy them though are buying into the status of the brand but some certainly are.

Yes I have a Master's in Child Development not because I wanted to become a teacher but because I'm interested in the subject. I can't say I'm interested in the paraphernalia but the prices of bugaboos are completely unfathomable and if they are indeed the best for your back, especially for someone who walks alot and doesn't drive as you've implied, then surely they might be more affordable for the less well off who won't have cars and have to do alot of walking! I know prams in general are incredibly expensive, which I find strange (I wonder the same at mass produced furniture). I think they are that price because they have become a status symbol for the middle class. The Mum's around Clapham pretty much all have bugaboos and pretty much all drive 4 x 4's so they're not doing much walking I know that!

DaveR Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Buggies are like cars. A boring Japanese or > Korean one will do the job. But lots of people > prefer a Golf. If you want a Bugaboo, get one. > It will do the job and look good. There are other > buggies that will do the job for quite a bit less > dough. The most sensible post on this thread! Sorry nabz, it's not your fault, I did go off on one I will admit! The right buggy is the right one for you surely. I hope you find it and if it's a bugaboo that you want then get one. Personally I think they are used as a fashion accessory by some, and a status symbol by some, but then others think they're the best out there for their personal needs so go with what you want. Don't be pressurised into spending the money though if you don't have it but if you do go for it.

To be honest KatsuQueen, I think I'd prefer the Mum's to buy themselves the shoes given that that's what they really want! ;-) Hate to break it to you Pickle and ClareC, but I'm a very happy non-Mum. For personal reasons (due to academic background) am interested in this room. I stand by my viewpoint that bugaboos are a status symbol. They're stupidly expensive no matter how 'good' they are, and they're that price because the manufacturers know that the Mum's buying them are buying into the status of the brand. It's the same with designer clothes- they're all made in China..

So it is a fashion accessory then?! You've just admitted as much although you got immediately upset when someone else suggested it, because they were judging you! I guess they were judging you right, maybe it's that that bothers you all so much. But fair enough if you want to feel good about yourselves by buying something pretty, I just wonder how you all seem to think the prettiest one is the most expensive one on the market? (Yes, I have gone pram shopping with friends with children and know how much they cost. )Which brings me to the conclusion that they are a status symbol given their price- only the wealthy can afford them. I think I've come to the conclusion now from reading this thread though that many Mum's with bugaboos are just frustrated, unhappy, and bored middle class stay at home Mum's who wish they could buy a pair of really expensive shoes and go back to their old lives but buy a really expensive buggy instead because they can no longer jusify buying the shoes to their husbands and to the other Mum's ;-)

fashion statement or status symbol? I think the latter.

Thirded!

Haha, totally agree Kalamity!

Very good article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/oct/14/cathy-come-home-lesson-rents-mortgages?commentpage

Why don't you try Peckham library? they have an excellent selection and get new books pretty often. And it's just down the road!!!

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think there is a sort of smug, > self-congratulatory, "we've made it" attitude > amongst some people. > > But the problem is not nearly as serious as it is > in Clapham. Soooooooooo true Jeremy!

Just as tenants have to go through certain checks, I think landlords should too. Not everyone should be allowed to be a landlord. It's taken so lightly by many people but it's a serious responsibility.

red devil Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Alan Medic Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > My son is sharing a house with 3 other > students. > > It's actually a 2 bedroomed house but the front > > room has been converted* into a bedroom, > > presumably to squeeze more tenants in and thus > be > > able to increase the rent. So to get in to the > > house other than through the front door (which > is > > in my son's bedroom) they must go through the > back > > door. To access this they must walk through the > > neighbours back yard as it is the only way in. > > I've emailed the landlady regarding the > situation > > of them having to trespass to get in to the > house > > (I never saw the place until I dropped my son > > there). I still await a reply, though it's been > > some days now. Now this sort of landlord is > taking > > the pi**. > > > > * they put some bedroom furniture in it > > Quite, and a reason why all landlords should be > licensed/regulated against this sort of practice. > Have you checked to see that everyone would get > out safely in the event of a fire? > Are smoke detectors fitted? Exactly Red Devil. Sadly this crap goes on all the time.

Ah Huguenot, how I've missed you ;-) By the way, I'm not a charity shop worker! I do charity work in my spare time for free- you should be very grateful for people like me ;-). And many hairdressers earn a very good salary thank you very much- a 'proper salary' as you put it, it's certainly not a hand to mouth existence as unlike many professions, hairdressers, especially good ones will always be needed so it's quite a sensible career choice I think! most people with 'proper' salarys still can't afford to buy because of the ridiculous deposits you need now. No irrational hatred of private landlords. Just that many people seem to have an irrational hatred of tenants on this thread and I wanted to balance it out. And that was exactly my point, people rent out their places often to make a business out of it. Fair enough you might say, but personally I think many landlords take the p***. Especially as many are not actually any good at being a landlord. If I have a good landlord, who fixes things straight away when things go wrong, who respects me as a tenant and actually just does everything above board then I might not resent lining their pockets. If you resent being a landlord but are making money from it then take your role seriously! otherwise buy a property and live in it and stop moaning! Of course, it is

Thank you Maxxi! I'm glad you're entertained ClaireC but I standby what I say. Mortgages are quite often lower than rental amount. KK, I know this because I have first hand experience of it. If you ask for the tenant just to cover the mortgage you're one of the good guys and believe me, there aren't many of you around. Maybe you just aren't aware of that. Maybe you think most people in your position are like you. A guy I used to know paid less than ?500 a month mortgage on his one bed property in Brixton Hill. He rented it out for ?1000 and got it because that's the amount he can command for rent in that area. I guy I used to date paid less for his mortgage on a one bed property in Balham/ Clapham South than I pay rent for a studio flat in ED. My friends landlord was commanding a ridiculous amount of money from her and the other tenants in her house- squashed in as many as she could so must have been getting about ?1600-2000 a month and it was ex council so she sure as hell was making some serious bucks from that one. I'm not saying ALL landlords are rolling in it. Those that have just one property and aren't really in it for the moeny, more to cover themselves until they sell and make their money that way, but most will take advantage if they can. How about you compare a single person paying a mortgage to a single person paying rent? The renter will be the one losing out. Not all renters are in couples- a pretty bad reason to get with someone I think ie. to save money on your rent!).

red devil, I believe it will continue to be that way in the future as it gets harder and harder to buy a property. I don't really see this situation turning around in my lifetime- and that's not me being cynical! People are in the buy to let game to make money. Renting is a business to most landlords.

How strange this post is. Why didn't the original poster put in all the facts at the start? how do they even know if there's going to be a problem if the tenant has until the 23rd Oct to leave meaning if she/he does then surely this whole post was a waste of time? Also, if the tenant has to leave by then then they themselves shouldn't have any problems because they're not making themselves intentionally homeless, their contract is merely up and their landlord has decided not to renew it so they have to leave. It's unfortuante but then he/she should have taken that into consideration when looking for somewhere because there's always going to be a set time on renting a property that is in the process of being sold- I wouldn't do it personally because I wouldn't want the hassle of trying to find another place to live. Just as an aside. It's very easy to find tenants, a month is plenty of time if you have a decent place in a decent area. It's not however so easy finding a decent place in a decent area for a decent rent! Especially for studios and ones beds so you need two months otherewise you could be homeless. Timing is often difficult for both parties but the amount landlords get for their properties is more than their paying for their mortgage so they'll have enough to cover themselves if their property is vacant for a couple of weeks.

Thirded. My Mum is a single parent, and I'm in awe of her everyday, as I am of all other single parents :)

Good for you DJKillaQueen. I've had a landlord harassing me before for because he thought I hadn't paid the rent. He knew I was a young female, lived on my own, and was in a vulnerable predicament but threatened to throw me out if I didn't provide proof of payment, told me he was not going to renew my contract (which he knew he was entitled to do) and kept calling me on my mobile. And I had paid my rent! He was obviously raking so much money in that he couldn't keep track of the odd ?600! new mother- if asking for a guarantor, you just need someone with a stable job and income and who gets a good credit reference. Please don't ask for someone who owns a property- not all people own a property in London. Nobody I know well who would be my guarantor does, including my parents but that certainly doesn't leave them on shaky grounds to be my guarantor. So in doing that you're excluding some tenants being able to rent the property who will most likely be good tenants. Most agents ask for someone earning a certain amount depending on the amount of rent the tenant will be paying. For example, ?23k for ?700 a month or something like that. A guarantor is also quite good for someone whose self employed if they haven't sorted their taxes yet.

ClaireC, the law actually heavily favours the landlord, absolutely not the other way around so I don't know where you got that from. Just because there are laws to say you can't physically remove a tenant from a property etc, that's more a question of human rights than the law favouring the tenant. And I know that because my entire generation are renters- everyone I know rents- and they all have horror stories when it comes to landlords, myself included. And I wanted to make that point as I didn't want the thread to become some rant about tenants. Although I appreciate there are some nightmare tenants too- it's just funny that you tend to hear more these stories in the media than the rogue landlords. I also did offer helpful advice. The OP actually doesn't state whether they have given them written notice of the amount of time they are legally entitled to to leave. Or whether they've actually legally done anything correctly. For all we know they are trying to evict the tenant before the tenant's contract has finished which means why on earth Should the tenant leave?!!!

Firstly, I would like to say there are many more rogue landlords than there are rogue tenants so let's not paint tenants with a bad brush please! I don't really understand though. Have you given them their two months written notice that they're entitled to if they have a contract with you? have you done everything properly, legally and above board?