Property Ladder

[shelli]

Did anybody out there see Property Ladder last night?

(NB don't normally watch it - as it's vulgar, but was waiting for Grand Designs repeat at 9 - although watching repeats is just as bad i know)

It was offensive what the chav music producer did to that beautiful cottage in Ross-on-Wye. Actually the presenter was just as bad suggesting he convert the former kitchen (complete with original range - which I'm sure was restorable) into "that all important 3rd bedroom". It had the most lovely beams and flag floors and he just ripped it all out and turned it into a hideous open plan laminate "crib" which he then sold - probably to one of his "Homies" - It was awful - it could have been beautiful

:x Shelli

 

[Penners]

Did anybody out there see Property Ladder last night?

No. I decided on the preferable alternative of sticking needles under my toenails.

 

[shelli]

It was car crash TV - But couldn't stop watching once started - it was horrible - was under hypnotic spell of Tube

 

[lindy]

I watched it too, and you are right, it was criminal what he did to that lovely cottage. I was so hoping he would be punished by not making any money but unfortunatley he made loads.

I also watch Homes Under the Hammer and sometimes I could scream at the people on there. A lot of people seem intent on buying Victorian/Edwardian houses and then stripping out all the original features so they look minimal and lifeless. Grrrrrrrrrr!

 

[Manny]

Sarah Beeny doesn't seem to have an ounce of respect for any property older than 1995. Oh how she loves everything to be 'contemporary' meaning you have to gut the place, paint everything white and fill it with hideous modern furniture that already looks dated.

 

[Manny]

Oh yes, and another thing: Why does everyone have to punctuate every sentence with the word 'space' every five minutes? 'What a lovely space', 'I love what you've done with this space', 'You could create a third bedroom here, that would be a great use of this space'.

It would be much better if they just bleeped out all the obligatory buzzwords people insist on using.

Space is where Captain Kirk lives, not some third-bedroom-come-study with contemporary Ikea furniture.

 

[shelli]

It's because thats all they have between their ears - space!!

 

[Flyfisher]

The substantial part of our house dates back to 1550 and still has some of the original windows, particularly at the rear. However, at some time during it's life it was given a 'Georgian' makeover, the front-facing windows were changed to large sash windows, many of the original internal beams were boxed in and a large adam-style fireplace was installed in the drawing room. Perhaps this was done by some modernist 'chav' of the times with no appreciation of the property's heritage. Today, of course, the whole place is GII*.

It's amusing to think that one of Sarah Beeny's ancestors could have made a documentary of the Georgian 'makeover' that so ruined the original period features and made such out-of-character changes to the house. I wonder what contemporary opinion made of the changes at the time?

 

[Penners]

The substantial part of our house dates back to 1550 and still has some of the original windows, particularly at the rear. However, at some time during it's life it was given a 'Georgian' makeover ... I wonder what contemporary opinion made of the changes at the time?

Poor things, they didn't have TV makeover shows to broadcast the news to a quivering nation.

 

[shelli]

Hi Flyfisher

the Georgian 'makeover' that so ruined the original period features and made such out-of-character changes to the house. I wonder what contemporary opinion made of the changes at the time?

Problem with modern makeovers is that the materials used just don't last. Your Georgian makeover 200 years after the 1st build in 1550 has lasted until now and frankly WOW what a priviledge to be able to call it your home.

these modern property makeovers are caravans by comparisons.

what i really objected to was that there was not even a glimmer of recognition that anything in the property was of value in itself. He all but bulldozed the house, which was frankly criminal.

 

[Johneds]

Interesting aside on the notion of one of these 'property developers' losing money on the deal. I was listening to the radio a couple months ago - can't remember which prog. Prob R4? And the bloke on was a producer of TV property makeover programmes. (Again, didn't catch which one)

Anyway, he was bleating on about how it was getting more and more difficult to find people that actually made money. Apparently there are hundeds that end in abject failure and bankruptcy but fewer and fewer that do ok. So why don't you make a few programmes about some of the failures, says the interviewer, I'm sure people would find that interesting. They both then laughed like drains and finally the bloke says - in that kind of Mr Bean type way - er yes, wouldn't exactly be the most rivetting prime time TV would it?

Now, I don't know, maybe it's just me, BUT THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WOULD LOVE TO SEE.

 

[tony]

Why are you all complaining, you know what the programme is like?

They arent going to use lime to plaster walls, as they want it to be dry in the next couple of days.

They are there to make money.
Victorian builders were never working on price work,
Not everybody likes period features ( the grand design where the architect ripped all period features from his house) yes, grand designs.


Get off your high horses, its about making money.

 

[Penners]

Victorian builders were never working on price work

What a strange assertion.

There was a huge building boom in Victorian times, to accommodate all the people who were flooding into the towns from the land. Do you really imagine that all the building was done on a kind of open-ended, "whatever-it-costs-so-long-as-it's-high-quality" arrangement?

I don't think so. Rich developers would have screwed prices into the ground.

 

[Craig]

Yes, the history of "modern" developers and the creation of a propery industry is well worth getting into. I recommend John Summerson's "Georgian London" which is a dead good read and has plenty about the speculative builders and how they worked.

Definetly all about making money. Always has been...

 

[Nigel Watts]

Problem with modern makeovers is that the materials used just don't last

Perhaps that is no bad thing.

Where I live, in a relatively prosperous part of London, more or less every time a house changes hands the kitchens, bathrooms and often much else get changed. I put a new kitchen into my previous house (1850s terrace in conservation area less than a mile away from where I now live). This replaced one that could not have been more than ten years old. My kitchen lasted no more than six or seven years before the new owner did what I had done - ripped it all out and put in something else.

Given this is what people do, it seems utterly pointless to me to build a kitchen (or a bathroom) that could last a hundred years. It is far more efficient and appropriate to build one that will start to fall apart gracefully after about five years and become more or less derelict in about ten.

[/quote]

 

[Nemesis]

Can't see the point in buying somewhere with period features then ripping them out. Why not buy a bland box in the first place is my view.

It's a fashion thing - soon it will be fashionable to be re-installing them again.

Trouble is, once the real thing is gone it's gone forever.

Not all buildings in the past were simply about making money - some people wanted to create something permanent and beautiful.

 

[Penners]

Not all buildings in the past were simply about making money - some people wanted to create something permanent and beautiful.

Absolutely, and that tradition continues today. But the two ideas are not mutually exclusive - you can build something permanent and beautiful that still represents a good investment.

I would suggest that most, if not all, contributors to this forum hope and intend that the work they do on their period properties will be permanent and beautiful.

But I doubt whether many of them will be willing or able to do it at a financial loss.

 

[Nemesis]

I never actually consider it really - simply plod on slowly spending and doing what is required. I suspect that I will have to be carried out feet first with the place still in need, but what the hell.

 

[Penners]

I will have to be carried out feet first

That bloody home-brew again...

 

[shelli]

Can't see the point in buying somewhere with period features then ripping them out. Why not buy a bland box in the first place is my view.

Absolutely 100% agree

I would suggest that most, if not all, contributors to this forum hope and intend that the work they do on their period properties will be permanent and beautiful.

Because we are curious, questioning types - we look at the building around us and ask Why? - and if the answer is because it works or because it's beautiful we try to do it like that.

That's not being on a high horse - that's being an authentic member of the human race.

:wink:

shelli X