Say hello to Barratt Homes' 'Brixton Square' on Coldharbour Lane (old Cooltan site)

[Mr Bim of Bar]

It is very villagey. You can see trees from the balcony. Round Old Street it's all about the Quarters.

Everything is a fucking square or a village these days.

It is very villagey. You can see trees from the balcony. Round Old Street it's all about the Quarters.

yeah, don't forget just around the corner we have OVAL QUARTERS

 

[editor]

yeah, don't forget just around the corner we have OVAL QUARTERS

Oh yes. Quarters. You've got to have some of them too.

 

[T & P]

"London Square"

Sounds like a name designed to appeal to overseas investors.

Or a place that wishes it was in London but knows it isn't. Which is weird, because Streatham is in London after all.

 

[leanderman]

LOWER Tulse Hill, and proud of it

 

[teuchter]

They should call it "Ceasar's Heights" and have the gilded horse/chariot thing over the gates.

 

[CH1]

They should call it "Ceasar's Heights" and have the gilded horse/chariot thing over the gates.

Reminiscent of the Second Crusade.

 

[ViolentPanda]

And you believe the breakdown?

Barrrats whole raison d'etre is to make money out of people.

I've rarely given credence to service charge spend breakdowns, too many intangibles ("miscellaneous items") and not enough tendering IME.

 

[T & P]

I'm amazed how much service charges can be. £200 a month sounds like a lot in my book, and a significant percentage of the rent/ mortgage residents would have to pay, even at London prices.

 

[leanderman]

I'm amazed how much service charges can be. £200 a month sounds like a lot in my book, and a significant percentage of the rent/ mortgage residents would have to pay, even at London prices.

Does seem a lot.

But I suspect Bim would realise if he was being ripped off.

 

[Mr Bim of Bar]

Does seem a lot.

But I suspect Bim would realise if he was being ripped off.

There's a lot of outgoings here. We have two full time concierges, who do a shift 8am till 8pm seven days a week, there are gardeners and cleaners here practically every week, also painters keeping the communal areas spotless, insurance, lighting, plus underfloor heating is included service charge, lift maintenance etc etc etc it all adds up, I think we are getting a fair deal here

 

[Manter]

I don't think it's unusual in the world of serviced blocks. You need to think of all the management and maintenance required, plus building up a fund... I have heard similar numbers before.

And I lived in the U.S. Where ten times that is not unusual....

 

[Mr Bim of Bar]

I don't think it's unusual in the world of serviced blocks. You need to think of all the management and maintenance required, plus building up a fund... I have heard similar numbers before.

And I lived in the U.S. Where ten times that is not unusual....

Friend of mine lives in a mansion block in Streatham hill and major works were needed to upgrade the block, there was very little in the reserve fund, so they are all now paying £5000 a year that's twice what we pay.

 

[Mr Retro]

I have experience of this from the VvA system in the Netherlands.

£200 a month is expensive but about right to keep the properties maintained to a high standard I would think. Like it or not everybody who buys now has one eye on investment and to protect that investment, especially in a new build of several flats, you have to be all over the maintenance.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I'm amazed how much service charges can be. £200 a month sounds like a lot in my book, and a significant percentage of the rent/ mortgage residents would have to pay, even at London prices.

IMO £200 a month is okay IF you have a full concierge service, and maintenance/rubbish collection/cleansing is prompt, but given how many people are bushwhacked for that sort of money for very little actual"service", it's often a gyp, and a main reason why groups of leaseholders collaborate to buy the freehold and set up their own services management companies.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Friend of mine lives in a mansion block in Streatham hill and major works were needed to upgrade the block, there was very little in the reserve fund, so they are all now paying £5000 a year that's twice what we pay.

Happened to a friend with a flat in The High on Streatham High Rd back in the '90s. The roofs were rotten. Turned out the facilities managers gave the work to friends, getting "mate's rates" along with an invoice for the supposed actual cost, then ripping off the leaseholders. Bill of £14,000 per property which suddenly went down by 60% when the managers got rumbled (and sacked). If they'd got away with it, they'd have banked about a million quid from the scam.
Always worth pestering for a full breakdown of costs, and don't let agents put you off - you have a legal right to see the costings and accounts.

 

[CH1]

Happened to a friend with a flat in The High on Streatham High Rd back in the '90s. The roofs were rotten. Turned out the facilities managers gave the work to friends, getting "mate's rates" along with an invoice for the supposed actual cost, then ripping off the leaseholders. Bill of £14,000 per property which suddenly went down by 60% when the managers got rumbled (and sacked). If they'd got away with it, they'd have banked about a million quid from the scam.
Always worth pestering for a full breakdown of costs, and don't let agents put you off - you have a legal right to see the costings and accounts.

Who owned it then then? Used to be Freshwaters - who didn't do much maintenance at all.

Theirs was a long term investment policy 1950s style: buy largely tenanted blocks, wait for the tenants to die and sell off leases.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Who owned it then then? Used to be Freshwaters - who didn't do much maintenance at all.

Theirs was a long term investment policy 1950s style: buy largely tenanted blocks, wait for the tenants to die and sell off leases.

May still have been Freshwaters. The roof maintenance was unavoidable, apparently. They'd been patching it with tar and roofing felt since the '70s, but the entire substructure had rotted due to water ingress. They had to put a canopy over the roofs in order to cut everything back to the fabric and replace. "For the want of a nail..." and all that.

E2A. IIRC the freehold is now owned by the leaseholders.

 

[equationgirl]

I agree rent controls would be very desirable.

The problem with buy-to-let is it is a cult reflected in BBC the programme "Homes under the Hammer" and similar Channel 4 shows.

Back in the 70s/80s, mortgage financed buyers got MIRAS (Mortgage Interest Relief at Source).
In those days mortgages were typically 10% interest rate and the subsidised rate was 7% for owner occupiers.

Buy to let (if they existed) would have to take a bank loan at 10%+

At the present time owner occupiers get no subsidy, but buy-to-let landlords have accountancy schemes to allow them to offset all costs of letting, including the mortgage, against tax on profits.

I would say then that buy to let landlords have much better tax rights than owner occupiers. In a way this is similar to the right to buy stocks on margin that led to the Wall Street Crash.

Only the mortgage interest can be offset against profits. Also certain costs such as insurance, wear and tear and maintenance can legally be offset as well.

 

[Mr Bim of Bar]

Only the mortgage interest can be offset against profits. Also certain costs such as insurance, wear and tear and maintenance can legally be offset as well.

Yes be interesting to find out how many BTL landlords actually declare their income

 

[Mr Bim of Bar]

Yes be interesting to find out how many BTL landlords actually declare their income

Oh my God it's rocking tonight behind these gates, parties galore, really loud but I kinda love the vibe

 

[CH1]

Only the mortgage interest can be offset against profits. Also certain costs such as insurance, wear and tear and maintenance can legally be offset as well.

That is the point. Mortgage interest is allowable against tax for people who buy-to-let, but not for people who buy a flat to live in. Scandalous!

 

[Mr Bim of Bar]

That is the point. Mortgage interest is allowable against tax for people who buy-to-let, but not for people who buy a flat to live in. Scandalous!

700 square feet

 

[Mr Bim of Bar]

700 square feet

700 square feet

700 square feet

Sorry won't let me post photo, 700 Square feet apartment in Brixton Square just went on market for £725,000

 

[editor]

Sorry won't let me post photo, 700 Square feet apartment in Brixton Square just went on market for £725,000

Sickening.

 

[CH1]

Sorry won't let me post photo, 700 Square feet apartment in Brixton Square just went on market for £725,000

I hope these people making near 100% profit on a subsidised buy to let investment are properly reporting their profits for capital gains tax.
If they don't I very much doubt that the Inland Revenue is was is up to the job of extracting the required tax.