The Daily Mail has another one of those car attacks house stories.
Sadly, the article does not mention how much the house was worth before and after. According to Zoopla, the house was "worth" somewhere in the region of £350,000 - £400,000.
Fear of scams
1 hour ago
11 comments:
Near the top of the article where it links to others, the first one goes to: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2336624/Would-spend-200-000-doing-house-just-make-neighbours-jealous-DEBBI-MARCO-did-Here-explains-.html
You could do a mash-up with those two!
Interesting that Sutton (Surrey) is given as Sutton, south London when the value drops, while Richmond (London) becomes Richmond, Surrey when the value rises.
And Mr Simpson, 32, is a project manager in London, while [Debbi's] husband Matt, 32, is a sports sponsorship manager presumably also in London, but that might not fit with being in Surrey.
D105, I like your way of thinking and good spot re Surrey/South London.
"According to Zoopla, the house was "worth" somewhere in the region of £350,000 - £400,000."
It's a sad day when you have to find out this sort of thing for yourself.
They should rebuild the masonry back up to the sides of the car and cut off the bit sticking inside with a gas torch to make a really unusual bay window.
" - demolishing a near-perfect square of brickwork in the process."
They forgot to photoshop the top picture to match their idea of near-perfection.
B, good idea but would you get planning permission to extend out into the road?
VFTS, don't be so churlish. That's about as rectangular as you are going to get by smashing a car into a brick wall.
M, interesting point that: all the bits of the car in contact with the ground appear to be on the householder's property. It could probably come under "permitted development".
B, I've added a picture. As you can see, the potential bay window is clearly on the public pavement at the side of the house. So no permitted development.
If you look at the close-up there is a gravel strip between the pavement and the house, which presumably belongs to the householder, or it would be tarmac, like the pavement. The wheels of the car are on this strip, so that all the "bay window" (or, strictly speaking, the "oriel window") that projects onto the pavement is in the air above the pavement and so possibly occupies the same legal position vis a vis the pavements as any projection from the house, like a balcony or one of those mediaeval first floors that sticks out.
B, yes, well spotted. There's a gravel strip which appears to be about 18" wide along the house, which we can assume belongs to the house.
We can also see that the back wheels of the car are resting on this strip. But the rest of it sticks out over the pavement.
But I suggest you write to the homeowner concerned and explain the loophole and how the car would make an interesting permanent feature for the house. A bit like that bloke with a shark on his roof.
Sadly, I expect the owner of the car will want it all back, not just the front end in little bits. People can be so short-sighted, sometimes.
Post a Comment