LondonMix

Well, he has used it to inform the public who can now email the council and make their views known...

In the article they made reference to the specific BofI rates that are changing. The current rates are 2.25% increasing to 4.49%. Many people, when they signed up to the rate would have been paying more before the Bank of England plummeted. Either way, it's totally wrong and I hope if those appealing are successful. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/cd85f110-81bd-11e2-b050-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2MZUQaPog

It doesn't sound like a part time nanny, it sounds like a mother help without sole charge care. 10 net is not the avg nanny salary (it is a top salary) and even then 10 net is for live out positions whereas au pairs / mother's help get room and board, language classes etc in addition to money. kateland Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sounds like a part time nanny to me-which I'm sure > is ?10 per hour,depending on experience. I think > nannies may charge more too for shorter hours. :)

Exactly. Also, the flats have nothing to do with M+S. That's a way for the freeholder to make money.

I do get the point. Most people will end up with a rate somewhere in between their current rate and new BofI rate. If they have at least 25% equity there are actually very similar rates available (though not for buy-to let). Either way, this is unfair which is why I said it will be interesting to see if the legal challenge is succesful. I just don't see it as the end of the real estate market and was trying to put it in context of changes BofI have made before that affected 9 times as many people.

Oh, I get that people can be bored. I just don't get why people link bored with having money so often. I can't see that the two things ever have anything to do with each other.

I?ve never understood that whole too much money and bored thing. I don?t see that the two have any link. I can?t imagine how you could be bored without any financial constraints on what you could do.

Yeah, Bank of Ireland did this last year too except that time it affected 100,000 residential mortgages. I think most people just switch providers as you'd be out of your locked in phase-- only those with no or very little equity will be trapped. Even so, a challenge to the financial ombudsman might find that this isn't really allowed. It will be interesting to see how that plays out.

Proved right about what? Did she say she could raise prices without losing customers or something? Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > They are in an area where people will pay the > prices, so they'll keep charging them. > > A former shop owner in the area once said to me "I > make money selling stuoid cushions to bored women > with too much money". Harsh, but she was proved > right.

Maybe they mean Northcross and the market etc rather than Upland (they might not have noticed that the name changes once you cross over Crystal Palace Rd).

For what? Selling, letting, buying, managing...

Yes, I agree that the school issue while important seems less a test of basic human decency than the rape issue with the police. It's a difficult issue to address. I feel for your sister. legalbeagle Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It happens in schools too, I'm told. My sister > teaches the first year at senior school. She tells > me that because Junior school are supposed to have > achieved certain levels/improvements for each > child by the time they leave the school, the > Junior school marks they enter her school with are > (sometimes) inflated considerably. She then either > has to continue the fictional achievements of the > school, or mark them honestly, which then reflects > badly on her school, as though the child as either > got worse or gone backwards. > > In a different, perhaps less immediately offensive > way to the rape example, this is equally worrying. > > > No one along the way has thought about what the > child is actually learning or achieving (except my > sis who marks honestly and takes the rap.......) > > It seems that vast numbers of us will just attempt > to meet the target, regardless of the effect on > the underlying people who need help. > > Does anyone have examples of where this is NOT how > humans react?

Agree

Wow that's terrible. Do you really think it was only about the targets though? Clearly it creates an additional incentive but if you aren't motivated by the desire the protect the public I imagine under all circumstances you are probably going to be a pretty lousy officer. For instance, their stats improved by encouraging victims to retract statement. However, if all those statements weren't retracted (because there were no targets) would those crimes have been properly investigated and solved or would the detection rate still have been 10%? I suspect lazy corrupt officers are lazy corrupt officers and this is just a case of them trying to cover their tracks once any kind of accountability comes into place. The terrible thing is the breach of trust with the victims. What happened is the worst possible response a victim of sexual crime can get from law enforcement.

There is a place on Grove Vale near the station where we got our beside tables for our spare room. They can make whatever you want and are fairly priced (given the quality which is very good).

Ratty probably meant in his budget... It's like everywhere. Barnes and Richmond have very tiny railway cottage style housing that's become very popular alongside the manor houses :)

Sorry, I mentioned in a previous post my irony / sense of humour has been completely deactivated by the mind numbing tedium of home renovations of late :/ Agree with your post though :)

Interesting Fuschia. So do you think if the value add score was emphasized more it might balance out the teaching priorities? The GCSE measurement would encourage schools to push average students and the value add measurement would encourage schools to push able students? Fuschia Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It's easier to progress those who are ahead than > those who are behind. > > http://www.localschoolsnetwork.org.uk/2013/02/maki > ng-expected-progress-a-deeply-flawed-measure/ > > > http://www.localschoolsnetwork.org.uk/2013/02/new- > gcse-measures-a-cautious-welcome/

Thanks Fuschia, that terrible. I suppose the value add scores create a somewhat distorted incentive too as its easier to progress students who are behind than those who are advanced?

You'd consider the brightest being 'held back' a good result?

Taxes won't make homes more affordable. That's like arguing stamp duty makes homes more affordable. The cost of buying a home is exactly the same except that the government rather than the vendor is getting a portion of your money. People pay whatever they can and it doesn't matter if a portion of it is in taxes. Headline prices of homes will go down but they won't be any easier to buy.

Sorry, I blame it on home renovation stress that I've lost all perspective and my sense of irony / humour... :/ Either way, I think we can all agree that fertility issues and treatment are a minefield!

What? I never said anything disparaging about young mothers. Social class never came into it. Why everyone assumes they know anything about my own class (my mother was a social worker, my husband grew up on benefits) is beyond me. I have money now but I don't come from money and my friends come from a wide range of social backgrounds. I'm happy for you that you intentionally started a family when you wanted to whatever your age. No one I am close to has chosen to do so in their 20s (on purpose) and its becoming a less common choice (particularly in cities) for a host of reasons. Your anger is not with me but lies with your own insecurity so stop projecting your crap on me!

Actually, 3 of my husband's friends from back home (in the country) started families in their 20s on purpose but I don't know them that well. Some girls from my high school as well.

I said on purpose. I know loads of people (including in my family) who had kids in their early 20s / teens. However, for all of them it was an accident.