Jump to content

Recommended Posts

How very odd to be away for a few days and come back to so much.... attitude


Haven't read enough posts from DiscoDex to form a true opinion - I think he might have over-egged an initial opinion but the last post seems to suggest a desire to retreat slightly and play a more co-operative approach - but feels he has been burned. Dex, all I would say is that a couple of very fine forum regulars have been in a similar position and have bounced back all the better for it, met with other forumites and generally pretty glad they stuck around so, you know, don't disappear yet


As for the rest of the house-prices-rising-it's-all-good mentality I have re-written that reply 4 times but deleted it - I nearly got sucked in on another thread

Yeah the house price topic has spiralled as out-of-control as house prices themsleves. There is nothing that can be done. Things will cost what people will pay for them. Bottom line. Foxton or no Foxtons.


The way the buy-to-let market and letting laws are exploiting a growing portion of society is another issue (but not for this thread or right now as my head hurts)


I'm sure nobody has any complaints about more money coming into the area and things being smartened up and I'm sure we all agree that the original cahracter of the area should be respected etc. but I'm not going to hug any of you because I'm an emotionally repressed male who gets uncomfortable when things get too touchy feely. I'm much better at fighting. ;-)

There's no attitude but a bit of banter. No one has been burnt! And everyone bounces back whether they are 'fine' forumities or not.


I am extending a hug/kiss whatever, to any fine forumites who may have been scorched before. I hope it wasn't MD74 that was responsible for the arson!

I'm bringing up a family in a rented home and I don't feel like a second class citizen.


We have a reasonable landlord who's evidently doing rather well for himself.


I don't expect to be able to own my own house anywhere I wish, but there's a large proportion of ED who do rent (check out the census info). I've lived here for 7 years, beginning as a singleton renter on a reasonable salary. I worked as a freelancer in tha arts (not, before I get forum mugged, as an actor).


Had I not fallen in love and had children perhaps I'd have been able to scrabble up onto the ladder and would now be gleefully rubbing my hands at the equity I'd accumulated. As it is, my financial positions been compromised by having kids and I don't imagine I'll be in a position to buy anywhere for years and, unless there's a shift in the housing market, not in London.


I feel stymied - stuck in renting with very little security other than the good will of our (so far so decent) landlord.


Many years ago we might have been candidates for social housing - earning but on relatively low incomes. These days, of course, thats not likely. Personally, I don't think owning a house is so important. What is important is being able to consider the place you live your home - make improvements, put up shelves, do the garden, redecorate. All of this feels difficult if you have no security of tenure.


Rents do keep rising despite the pirate landlords and the growing buy to let market. If ours keep rising we may have to consider moving.


Our kids attend local nurseries and are about to start school. This a community I've become deeply embedded in and it feels odd to be told that as we're not wealthy enough we should move out.


Perhaps I'm not undrestanding the posts correctly, but do you really want to live in a homogenous community of people with pretty vast wealth?


The national average income is around ?23k.


The fact is that, aside from housing costs, you don't really need that much money to live. You just stop buying stuff. You can eat well and cheaply. There's stacks of free stuff to enjoy in London and children, far from costing masses of cash, enable you to see that "things" matter less than you think.

that was really touching Bawdy_Nan. I have no kids but put my acting career on hold because of falling in love too. I won't be on that elusive property ladder for some time either. But the sinking feeling at not being sure of my longeivity in the flat I rent now does make life very very tough. It makes it worse when the bloody property management company the landlord is with keeps insisting on putting up their 'managed by' boards outside our flat! Advertising to the world that we're not on that 'ladder', making us feel almost like transients.

MadWorld74 said:

"the property management company... keeps insisting on putting up their 'managed by' boards outside our flat"


There is a company that rates Estate Agents by the number of Sold/Let by signs in an area so it's in their interest to keep these pesky signs up (as well as it being free advertising for them). If a sign's been up for more than 14 days tell the agent to take it down, you don't have to say who you are, just call them and say it's been up for more than 2 weeks and they have to take it down. They'll probably say their board removal people will be round in the next week to remove it but it sometimes gets "overlooked". If they don't take it down tell them about The Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 1992, read down to:


Class 3 Miscellaneous temporary advertisements

Description. 3A. An advertisement relating to the sale or letting...

Conditions and Limitations.

3A.

(2) No advertisement may be displayed indicating that land or premises have been sold or let, other than by the addition to an existing advertisement of a statement that a sale or letting has been agreed, or that the land or premises have been sold or let, subject to contract.

(3) Any such advertisement shall be removed within 14 days after the sale is completed or a tenancy is granted.


I heartily encourage everyone to ring the number on these signs and request that they be removed.


Good luck and let us know how you get on

I've taken them down myself too in the past but if you do and the wall/post/thing it's attached to is damaged then you'll get done for criminal damage. Best get the estate agent's people to do it. I've just asked for the one next door to me to be removed, let's see how long they* take to remove it.


* Their name will be revealed when it's removed

I've just rung the property agents to complain and vent my anger at these things. Apparantly I'm 'stuck in the system' (tell me about it love) and that's why they keep appearing every few months. I'm going to make a bonfire with it next time, take Brendans lead.

long ladder? oh my god I'm short but am able to reach the sign that's at street level! Excellent. Lets BBQ on. Lets have a board amnesty and BBQ all the boards in the mile radius of my house. ooohhh look at the pretty flames, aren't they high!


(NB I have no previous criminal convictions and have never been interested in arson)

..........would be a pleasure.


If you were to sell your house in ED for 500k then costs would be as follows:


Stamp Duty - 3% = GBP15,000

Agent Fee - 1.5%-2% +VAT = GBP10,000

Rental Trucks/Removal Co. etc = GBP2,000+



This works out to be at least GBP 27,000..... :)

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...