Shawbury rd - Grand Designs tonight

[benfaulkner]

Apologies if this has been posted already, but tonight's episode of GD is the conversion on Shawbury Road, a few doors along from Blue Brick Cafe.

(apologies in advance for DM link..)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-4946076/Grand-Designs-couple-buy-derelict-Victorian-building.html

[RubyGraeme]

Pseuds corner.

[sillywoman]

In 'Herne Hill'? Since when?

[edhistory]

A good example of vandalism of our industrial architectural heritage.

[bsand]

?1.2m for a two bedroom , no bath only shower room - they have one kid now. Will be a difficult sell down the line. Plus they have one of those fashionable wood burners that is poisoning the children. Looks nice though.Plus it may have been a dairy but I knew it as Walsh's Glazing which I found very useful over the years. All the useful shops like locksmiths, electricians etc have gone now. I mean how much artisanal coffee does one need.

Plus the kitchen is just a cooker and two cupboards - good job they won't be doing any cooking or it would pollute the whole of the downstairs furnishings.

[fishbiscuits]

Vandalism? I think it looks rather nice. Better than knocking it down.

[Abe_froeman]

Interesting program. They said at the end that cost was ?290k but they were hoping to get it down to ?272k when tbey got the VAT back.

Made me wonder how you can claim back VAT on rebuilding your own home.

[ed_pete]

I think some VAT can be reclaimed if you are converting a building that was previously non-residential to residential use. I think this is one of the reasons barn conversion are popular as the developer is able to reclaim some of the VAT.

[Sonners]

It's not reclaiming as such but some works can be charged at 5% VAT rather than 20% if certain criteria are met. But the owners ought to have dealt with that at the beginning of the project if the works qualified rather than trying to apply it to invoices retrospectively...

[edhistory]

You need to have a legitimate VAT registration to claim a legitimate VAT refund.

Why are these people VAT registered?

Is there a yet to be told backstory?

[sheff]

As Sonners says... 5% on certain builds or renovations.

We benefitted on a derelict renovation. No need for a VAT reg.

As for the building... much better than a derelict yard.

I thought it looked great.

[edhistory]

I'd like to see the law on this.

But I'm more interested about how HMRC credited your bank account if you were not registered.

[MissWiggy]

There are lots of reasons they might be VAT registered. For example I am as I am self employed.

Also the kitchen is more than a cooker and 2 cupboards - there was a whole of cupboards that could be seen.

I think it's great they bought it and preserved some of the original architecture. It was on the market for a while and would have been knocked down and developed into flats if they hadn't come along.

Such negativity on the forum but I don't know why that surprises me any more!

[edhistory]

Miss Wiggy,

Which part of the original architecture was preserved?

[hammerman]

Not interested in the building at all but wondering why the OP is apologising for their Daily Mail link?

[sheff]

In our case we simply gave HMRC proof of empty status (3 years) and then any contractor could charge 5% VAT on allowable works.

You can read all the VAT notices if you want.

As for the building, any developer like HYN or whatever they are called would have levelled the plot.

edhistory Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'd like to see the law on this.

>

> But I'm more interested about how HMRC credited

> your bank account if you were not registered.

[edhistory]

That makes sense. Not a VAT refund, but a lower rate of VAT on an invoice.

[edhistory]

> As for the building, any developer like HYN or whatever they are called would have levelled the plot.

Which part of the plot was not "levelled"?

[pg500]

Some plastic was removed from the courtyard roof while the existing building remained at the back of the plot with alterations made to the roof and internal walls. So essentially none of it was "levelled"

[dc]

hammerman Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Not interested in the building at all but wondering why the OP is apologising

> for their Daily Mail link?

Really?

[Seabag]

I'd like to live there, for myself I'd have bought the top of the building forward.

But ?1.2 million is a lot. that said it isnt my ?1.2 so good luck to them

Nice FabCo doors btw

[Elphinstone's Army]

MissWiggy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> There are lots of reasons they might be VAT

> registered. For example I am as I am self

> employed.

>

> Also the kitchen is more than a cooker and 2

> cupboards - there was a whole of cupboards that

> could be seen.

>

> I think it's great they bought it and preserved

> some of the original architecture. It was on the

> market for a while and would have been knocked

> down and developed into flats if they hadn't come

> along.

>

> Such negativity on the forum but I don't know why

> that surprises me any more!

no. 36 is their registered company address

[maxxi]

I have passed by on a number of occasions over the last few months and my natural curiosity has only ever been met with a kind of defensive "what-are-you-looking-at?" response which, now I realize they only wanted people to see what they were doing if it got nationwide tv exposure, makes sense. lovely to have then as neighbors now though..... Bless.

[Mark]

MissWiggy Wrote:

>

> Such negativity on the forum but I don't know why

> that surprises me any more!

A couple of people saying they don't like it/having a different opinion to yours doesn't mean the whole forum's negative about it. It's like saying you found a bruised apple in your bag and so the veg shop's got to pot.

I thought the building was nicely done, keeping the original ironwork and original front doors out on show* was a nice touch. Not what I would have spent the money on but respect for people who tastefully push boundaries, which is always going to rattle a couple of locals' cages. Oh, and good to have a local talking point on TV that's not about crime.

* that's two for you edhistory

[jimmyraj]

I liked it. And I suspect it will have a resale market. It would definitely sell for more than the cost of the land plus build costs.