Bottoms up - infill panels with a difference.

[88v8]

Hyperbolic listing, 'orrible exposed internal brick, cement pointing, and I wonder what the CO would think about those infill panels? :shock:
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-34290105.html?utm_content=v2-ealertspropertyimage&utm_medium=email&utm_source=emailupdates&utm_campaign=emailupdates3day&utm_term=buying&sc_id=4990530&onetime_FromEmail=true

Bottoms up!

Ivor

 

[Penners]

Ye Gods!! What a temple to appalling taste and unforgiveable vandalism!! The strange thing is that, although it is described as 13th century, no mention is made of its being listed. I can only imagine that the CO took one look at it and gave up.

The estate agent's purple prose is almost as excruciating as the building.

"This surely unique home is looking for a visionary with deep pockets to reclaim its glory days"

"Spectacular reception rooms creaking with soul"

"Character defining character home"

A copper window? I mean.... COPPER?

 

[mims&pip]

Oh my god :shock:

What a pretty house in a lovely setting, but what a disaster internally I love copper - but a copper window? In a house of that character? Oh dear! I have to say it puts me in mind of the *Disneyfication* that greeted us when we first viewed our last house, only in our case there were badly pointed stone walls as opposed to brick and a few pastiche-type fake beamed partitions. At least ours was (relatively) easily rectifiable and tbh at least the pretend beamed walls were well executed - as the person who committed such crimes against the linked property should be :lol:

Even I struggle to know where I'd begin with that little gem.....what a pity. It could be beautiful......

Thanks for the link Ivor.

Mims x

 

[Flyfisher]

A copper window? I mean.... COPPER?

Yes, that was the, erm, 'standout' item for me.

Looks like a lovely location though.

 

[mims&pip]

The strange thing is that, although it is described as 13th century, no mention is made of its being listed. I can only imagine that the CO took one look at it and gave up.

A quick perusal of English Heritage throws up no obvious listed status for Tump Court.....although I must confess I often struggle with searching their site :roll: Therefore perhaps you are correct Penners and it's (another) former gem that has slipped through the net

 

[Penners]

...it's (another) former gem that has slipped through the net

...with disastrous results!

 

[tobydog]

Although the inside looks horrendous, I reckon it could be a fairly straight forward fix. The thatch looks like it was done fairly recently and the timber frame and sole plates look in remarkably good condition for a house dating from the 13th century. All the nasty follies can be removed and the particularly bad pointing on the inside of the infill panels could easily be lime rendered. Remove the dodgy porch and the ranch style canopy and you could have a real gem on your hands worthy of listing. Not sure I'd want the bills though for all the heat lost through those single skin infill panels.

 

[noj]

It's not listed - the map search on the National Heritage site shows nothing (absolutely nothing!) listed in that area

 

[mims&pip]

It's not listed - the map search on the National Heritage site shows nothing (absolutely nothing!) listed in that area

Thanks for confirming that noj :wink:

 

[jocelyn plummer]

With a name like Tump Court and a description of 'creaking with character' how can one resist it? Apart from some wonderful additions to windows etc I think the house could definitely be saved in all its glory. Wonder who lived in it!--maybe nobody has dared go near it --should be listed though hope there is somebody around to get it listed.

 

[charlieboy]

Surely this is just fashion. Part of the evolution of an old building.

It is no different than my house with its 200 year old Georgian frontage and ten foot high parapet added to a humble 400 year old thatched cottage.

Maybe it will be listed in 200 years time because of its pop bottle panels!

(Now there is an interesting question. Why do we say 10 foot high and not 10 feet high?)

 

[Penners]

Why do we say 10 foot high and not 10 feet high?

We? I never do! It represents the kind of lazy use of language, up with which I will not put!

:wink:

Actually, I prefer to say 3.0487804 metres (approximately)!

 

[Keith Bowman]

Why do we say 10 foot high and not 10 feet high?

We? I never do! It represents the kind of lazy use of language, up with which I will not put!

:wink:

Actually, I prefer to say 3.0487804 metres (approximately)!

Hmmmmm. So what do you call the hundred foot drain? I suppose you could say a chain, a rod and a bit

 

[wobs]

Why do we say 10 foot high and not 10 feet high?

We? I never do! It represents the kind of lazy use of language, up with which I will not put!

:wink:

Actually, I prefer to say 3.0487804 metres (approximately)!

We have a tenfoot behind our property (it's a Hull thing). Its gated, and first born loves to run up and down it (short hosepipe optional).

 

[charlieboy]

What is a "tenfoot"

Is it a back yard?

Oh no! That would be a threefoot.

 

[MatthewC]

What is a "tenfoot"

In railway terms, the tenfoot is the space in the middle between the second and third tracks on a four track line. On the same line, the space between the first and second (which usually go in the same direction) is the "sixfoot" as is the space between the third and the fourth. The space betwen the rails on each line is the "fourfoot" (although the actual UK gauge is 4ft 8.5 ins). But these are all names rather than the exact measurement, so perhaps "tenfoot high" means it's approximate?

 

[Penners]

So what do you call the hundred foot drain? I suppose you could say a chain, a rod and a bit

Nothing of the sort, Keith. I would call it a 30.487804 metre drain. It trips off the tongue.

 

[wobs]

What is a "tenfoot"

Is it a back yard?

Oh no! That would be a threefoot.

A tenfoot is a back alley in Hull, but it is only a tenfoot if it allows for cars to access a garage at the back of a property. Almost interestingly, ours goes along the full row of our terrace block, but was only built in 1947, so the entire community in this row must have agreed to have it built - complete with drain, and concrete surface.

In reality, it is just under ten feet wide.

A few other tenfoots near us are actually much wider (about twice as wide), as they were built when the houses were built (late victorian or 1900s), and are big enough for a horse & cart. Some still have the old stables complete with hayloft etc.

 

[Penners]

A few other tenfoots near us are actually much wider (about twice as wide)

Not that I'm a pedant, you understand, but wouldn't that make them twentyfoots?

 

[Keith Bowman]

So what do you call the hundred foot drain? I suppose you could say a chain, a rod and a bit

Nothing of the sort, Keith. I would call it a 30.487804 metre drain. It trips off the tongue.

That damned Bonaparte again! Perhaps we should insist on all period properties being measured in proper period units - chains, links, rods, poles, perches, ells, fathoms, the length of Henry VIII's big toe etc.

And while we are at it, the Twenty Foot is another Fenland drain!