Search results

gaucho or grill on the alley.

My due date is a little bit further away than that, but we have decided he will definitely not be looking!

another point is that if the value goes up, and you want to sell, by the time you have paid off the government percentage, you may not actually have enough to redeem the mortgage. So basically youd better like youre house because youre trapped there.

we fond a tesco bank one which was fixed for 5 years and that seemed pretty good.

The percentage remains static, so if the value of the property goes up the value of your loan goes up too.

Guess so. Im just basing my opinion on a couple of friends who bought new build houses from plan, then it turned out the price of them went down. Thats probably;ly not the usual way though!

I'm no expert in mortgages, so this is just my opinion. The good points are that you need a lower deposit and it would help people get on the property ladder. But from what Ive read, the loan stays at a fixed percentage, rather than a value. So if you buy a house for 100k, you get 20k, but if...

oh god. criiiinge.

£75 for 2 hours

Fancy dress party coming up, with a theme best of british. give me your ideas!!! also, ideas for a sort of joint ideas me and bf could do together would be good!

greed, ive had it for flying. Not good for you long term though.

Youre confusing the two separate trains of action. one would be the criminal aspect, and the other is in negligence. you are along the right lines but are blurring the two.

shoooes!

we drove past again this evening, and the ceiling appears to have been fixed. we have a viewing on thursday evening anyway. (mother in law wants to see the house)

The fact is, you appear to be confusing the ability to sue for damages for a criminal injuries compensation claim, and the ability to prosecute the tattooist. A claim in negligence is going to be difficult because it's difficult to show the breach in duty, even if there is a duty of care...

besides the fact that there is no wsay to quantify the loss, to sue for negligence there needs to be 3 things: relationship, breach, and loss as a reult of the breach. the relationship is between the kid and the tattooist. where is the breach? he went in asking to be tattood. He got tattood...

I asked what he would be suing FOR. the negligence has to result in a loss to sue.

the offer was based n what we thought it was worth, with the cieling intact. A house is only worth what someone is prepared to pay.

We viewed it, and The agents called the next day asking for feedback. I said we were very interested, but that the offer we would be prepared to put in would be 30k less than the asking price. They called back the next day and said the vendor is very keen to sell, and if we offered 5k more...

Thats brilliant, but not what I asked though.