• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Collapse

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "Dim Prawn finally makes it"

Collapse

  • Sysman
    replied
    Originally posted by eek View Post
    I meant to post the Daily Mail version from last weekend but couldn't find it so posted the first link I saw. The important bit was more to emphasis that if the original date on the original Daily Telegraph article (over 5 years ago).

    They have wanted to sell for 5 years yet have failed to do so.
    Thanks for that info. My first thought on seeing the link was whether it was the same couple I read about back then.

    Originally posted by eek View Post
    I wonder why that is. Could it be that they are too big and the houses too poor quality for anyone to be interested. ([b]the poor quality bit is true as I know people who rent there and they will never go near a Wilson property[b]).
    The landlord with the crappiest houses in my student days was a teacher. Is there a theme here?

    Leave a comment:


  • Sysman
    replied
    Originally posted by barrydidit View Post
    Thats the lefty guardian take on it. They've probably got a beef about them not taking benefits tenants any longer. My information comes from the telegraph which admires their entrepreneurial talents
    Well The Telegraph probably would, because the Barclay Brothers' fortune came from the property market (London hotels).

    Leave a comment:


  • vetran
    replied
    would of thought they would do them up before selling them using 'Wilson property maintenance in tax haven Ltd' and get a better return.

    Leave a comment:


  • Old Greg
    replied
    Which one is dim?

    Leave a comment:


  • barrydidit
    replied
    Originally posted by eek View Post
    I meant to post the Daily Mail version from last weekend but couldn't find it so posted the first link I saw. The important bit was more to emphasis that if the original date on the original Daily Telegraph article (over 5 years ago).

    They have wanted to sell for 5 years yet have failed to do so. I wonder why that is. Could it be that they are too big and the houses too poor quality for anyone to be interested. (the poor quality bit is true as I know people who rent there and they will never go near a Wilson property).
    Well it hasn't been the best 5 years for selling 1000 houses in one go, i suppose. But then there is loads of chinese money swilling about so perhaps there is something rubbishy about their portfolio. I have no personal experience so willl take your word as gospel!

    Leave a comment:


  • eek
    replied
    Originally posted by barrydidit View Post
    Thats the lefty guardian take on it. They've probably got a beef about them not taking benefits tenants any longer. My information comes from the telegraph which admires their entrepreneurial talents

    I suspect, as usual, the truth lies somewhere between the two.

    It's interesting about UKAR, the telegraph info says they're mortgaged to 60% on the portfolio - i shouldn't have thought they (ukar) would be in a rush to get their money back under those circumstances?
    I meant to post the Daily Mail version from last weekend but couldn't find it so posted the first link I saw. The important bit was more to emphasis that if the original date on the original Daily Telegraph article (over 5 years ago).

    They have wanted to sell for 5 years yet have failed to do so. I wonder why that is. Could it be that they are too big and the houses too poor quality for anyone to be interested. (the poor quality bit is true as I know people who rent there and they will never go near a Wilson property).
    Last edited by eek; 18 July 2014, 10:49.

    Leave a comment:


  • barrydidit
    replied
    Thats the lefty guardian take on it. They've probably got a beef about them not taking benefits tenants any longer. My information comes from the telegraph which admires their entrepreneurial talents

    I suspect, as usual, the truth lies somewhere between the two.

    It's interesting about UKAR, the telegraph info says they're mortgaged to 60% on the portfolio - i shouldn't have thought they (ukar) would be in a rush to get their money back under those circumstances?

    Leave a comment:


  • DodgyAgent
    replied
    Originally posted by northernladuk View Post
    No mention of their tax bill though.
    He thinks he's safe living on the Isle of Wight and occasionally commuting to Swindon

    Leave a comment:


  • eek
    replied
    Originally posted by barrydidit View Post
    These guys pop up in the telegraph quite regularly. I think they were looking at £40m tax.
    No they are still trying to work out how to sell the properties see Britain's biggest buy-to-let landlords to sell entire portfolio of properties | Money | The Guardian

    Or to be more accurate www.ukar.co.uk are looking at how they can remove the loans from their loan book and the Wilson's may if they are incredibly lucky get something out of it.

    From what I hear from Ashford their houses are about the least desirable on the rental market as its impossible to get repairs done and nothing has been done while in their ownership to keep them in a decent state of repair...

    Leave a comment:


  • barrydidit
    replied
    Originally posted by northernladuk View Post
    No mention of their tax bill though.
    These guys pop up in the telegraph quite regularly. I think they were looking at £40m tax.

    Edit - here they are. It says £30m
    Last edited by barrydidit; 18 July 2014, 10:34. Reason: linky

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladuk
    replied
    No mention of their tax bill though.

    Leave a comment:


  • DodgyAgent
    started a topic Dim Prawn finally makes it

    Dim Prawn finally makes it

    Meet retired teachers who are richer than the Beckhams with their £180m buy-to-let empire | Mail Online

    We now know why he has been so quiet recently. He has been selling his empire. I can also see why he has chopped his missus in

    Question is .. is he richer than SASguru ?

Working...
X