News - California fire residents return home

Posted on September 30, 2007
Filed Under Property insurance | Leave a Comment

Residents in southern California have begun to return to their homes after firefighters succeeded in containing most of the region’s forest fires.

Many have found their homes and communities devastated by the flames and authorities have warned that electricity may not be restored to affected areas for weeks.

Light rain and snow and increasingly mild weather has aided efforts to combat the blazes and three of the largest fires - the Cedar fire in San Diego County and the Old Fire and Grand Prix fires in San Bernardino County - are now largely under control.

About 17 fires have ravaged the state in the past few weeks, killing at least 20 people, destroying more than 3,300 homes and scorching more than 750,000 acres (300,000 hectares) of land.

‘We’ll be fine’

Residents of Cedar Glen, a small town in the San Bernardino Mountains, lost more than 350 homes in the fires, which are still blazing in a broken arc in the counties of Los Angeles, Ventura, San Bernardino and San Diego.

Click below to see a detailed map of the affected areas

Enlarge Image

Homeowners found buildings incinerated and molten lumps of metal where their cars had been left in driveways.

“We’ve lost our home, our business, our valuables and our retirement,” resident Camie Pretzinger told French news agency AFP, as she sifted through the charred remains of her home.

“I just don’t know what we’ll do now. It’s all so unreal.”

Others, such as Margaret Vega, 75, vowed to rebuild as soon they could “as long as the insurance company pays up”.

“We’re Californians at heart; we’re used to disasters and we’re used to recovering. We’ll be fine,” she told AFP.

Disaster zone

With major blazes almost contained firefighters are now concentrating on building firebreaks to protect threatened communities before the expected return of the Santa Ana desert winds - which fanned the flames - this week.

HAVE YOUR SAY

I live in the middle of this mess and it looks like a battlefield out here

Michael Davis, US

Your experiences

Equipping the firefighter

Authorities also planned to send as many as 3,000 firefighters home, the Associated Press news agency reported.

The economic impact of the fires has been estimated at $2bn, though this is likely to increase once property values and re-building costs are added.

With insurance claims also estimated to top $100bn, US President George W Bush has declared the affected areas a disaster zone, pledging the federal government will give all possible assistance.

At least two of the fires are believed to have been the result of arson and another is said to have been lit as a distress signal by a lost hunter.

Originaly from

News - Property searches in terror alert

Posted on September 29, 2007
Filed Under Property insurance | Leave a Comment

Police have searched two properties in Birmingham following the disrupted plot to bomb UK planes travelling to the US.

West Midlands Police have arrested two people under the Terrorism Act as part of the national police operation.

A property in Belchers Lane, Bordesley Green, and a house in Margarets Road, Ward End, were searched during the operation. The two men are in custody.

Local residents in both areas said they were shocked by developments, with some criticising the police.

The two-storey shuttered building on Belchers Lane is thought to include a business on the ground floor and a residential flat on the first floor.

‘Really shocked’

It was cordoned off and guarded by uniformed officers.

Neighbours reported seeing a small police van arrive at the building at 0330 BST on Thursday, with two larger police vans pulling up at about 0700 BST.

Local residents said the business had changed hands several times over recent years, going from an industrial cleaning firm to an insurance company and now its current occupiers.

Local councillor Ansar Ali Khan said: “I was really shocked at this news.

“This ward is a multi-racial, multi-ethnic area and people live in peace and harmony. It is a diverse ward and we have never had a problem.”

Notice at Birmingham International Airport

Midlands airport delays

Dr Mohammad Naseem, chairman of Birmingham Central Mosque, said: “With the track record of the police, one doesn’t have much faith in the basis on which people are detained.

“It poses the question whether the arrests are part of a political objective, by using Muslims as a target, using the perception of terrorism to usurp all our civil liberties and get more control while moving towards a totalitarian state.”

The front door of the terraced house in St Margaret’s Road had been damaged by the police operation and forensic officers were at the property.

Ikram Ulhaq, whose daughter had religious lessons at the house, said: “I don’t know what happened there, all I know is they are peaceful, religious people.

“They were teaching Koran and all that to the young kids, how they read the Koran, how they pray five times a day.

“I’m shocked, I’m definitely sure they’ve got the wrong people.”

Originaly from

News - UK voters’ panel: Gary Watson

Posted on September 28, 2007
Filed Under Property insurance | Leave a Comment

Chris Li:
Bournemouth

“I am so pleased that the government knows who the key voters are - working families and pensioners are the ones who will get them re-elected”

Watch Chris’s views

Gary Watson:
Peterborough

“This Budget has done nothing for me, which is better than the previous eight under Gordon Brown, and seems to be a non-event”

Watch Gary’s views

Philippa Bartlett:
Rothwell, Northants

“All in all there were no nasty surprises, lots of popular moves and no clear explanations as to how everything is going to be paid for”

Watch Philippa’s views

Watch Gary’s views

I didn’t expect this to be a dramatic or contentious Budget and there were very few real surprises.

The only people gaining from this Budget appear to be pensioners. This help is long overdue.

It’s unfortunate that the help is very limited. I doubt free bus travel and a 200 council tax rebate will have many dancing in the streets.

Rather than a freeze on corporation and insurance premium taxes, a reduction would have helped businesses, especially small companies like mine, where there is not much capital for reinvestment and a minimum level of insurance is a legal requirement.

With my school governor hat on, I hope the refund of VAT for building our children’s centre means the money spent on our centre will go further.

This would be a huge benefit to the area, but we’ll have to see where the rebate goes.

My biggest concern was not addressed in the Budget. There were no real tax improvements at any level of income. I would have expected some sweeteners to make us feel the economy is doing well.

Does no sweeteners mean the economy is not doing well? I think that must be so.

This Budget has done nothing for me, which is better than the previous eight under Gordon Brown, and seems to be a non-event.

I certainly won’t be changing my voting intentions because of this.

Return to the top

Send us your comments on Gary’s views using the form below.

Your comments:

I agree with Gary: A damp squib of a Budget. It does nothing for younger voters or professionals. It’s crude vote grabbing at its worst.
Jon Harrison, York, England

As an older voter I find Gary’s belief that the UK economy is not doing well to be quite extraordinary. Property values have risen consistently, especially in Peterborough and on the back of rising employment and real take home pay there and across the east of England. Moreover the undisputed real growth in national incomes is 25% over the seven years, and faster than ever before or in most of the major European economies. Consequently we find overseas holiday prices to be more affordable for Brits than for many years.
Andrew Dundas, Ilkley, UK

The economy is in appalling shape. It’s just that no one is prepared to admit it. We have spiralling public and private pension costs and no way of paying them. The police, fire and medical services have huge numbers of people about to reach retirement, and no money set aside to pay for them. These problems have been building up for the last 30-40 years as successive governments have collected NI payments from people and spent them, meaning there is nothing saved.
Nathan Hobbs, Luton, UK

The 200 isn’t per year, it’s a one off deal - so it’s a pre-election bribe and nothing more. It does nothing to deal with the root inequities of council tax, and the amount Labour has allowed it to rise. The economy didn’t just suddenly start growing in May 1997 - Gordon inherited a growing economy from the Conservatives and stuck to their spending plans at first.
James, London, UK

A solid economy from the Tories? Since when have a recession and crumbling public services been seen as solid? Have you completely forgotten the early 90s?
Gemma, Manchester

Does Gemma not realise that Gordon Brown’s famous 50 quarters of continuous growth includes at least four years of Tory government? Yes, Labour did inherit a solid economy. If she can’t forget problems in the 80s and early 90s (whilst the country was being sorted), is she prepared to remember the woeful performance of previous Labour governments? By the way, I have voted Conservative only once in 30 years, but I recognise their achievements.
Tony Weddle, Newbury, UK

Interesting to see the viewpoint that the economy is not doing well - we currently have the highest growth in Europe. As usual Conservative supporters seem to view the past under the Tories with rose tinted spectacles - have they forgotten the cycles of boom and bust in the 80s and 90s? Can they not objectively compare this with the largest period of sustained, stable growth since 97? I am particularly impressed with the comment about it being about time pensioners got some help - if Gary was truly concerned about this he would not support the Conservatives, the party that has caused the most harm to pensioners’ financial positions.
Mark Davies, London, UK

When Brown started his chancellorship he stuck with Tory spending limits and the country’s finances were in the black with national debt being repaid. Today there is a large deficit again and the only way the paltry bribes of this Budget can be financed is to tax North Sea Oil revenues in advance. As to the Conservatives having “caused the most harm to pensioners’ financial positions” Mark Davies ought to look carefully at Brown’s removal of dividend tax relief and the yet more taxes on insurance companies included in this Budget.
Alan Tayler, Wivelsfield, UK

The equivalent of 4 a week, 200 per year, means nothing to Gary, but it is a big chunk to us pensioners. Along with the 200 to help with the fuel bills, makes 8 per week, on top of our pension. I would like a pension raise on top of that sometime.
William, Rochdale, England

I agree with Gary - a non-event. If I drink one pint of beer less per week I will be 5p better off! Just the incentive I need to vote for a party bent on removing personal liberties at any cost.
Chris, Leicester, UK

I agree - this budget tacitly acknowledges that the economy is not in great shape. They inherited something very solid from the Tories, and have now messed it up.
Ed, London, UK

Terms & Conditions

News - Lost luggage payouts increase

Airline passengers will now receive more compensation for delayed, lost or damaged luggage, following new international rules.

Under the newly ratified Montreal Convention, payouts will be related to the value of the goods, and passengers can receive compensation from airlines of up to 800.

The legislation applies to all flights departing or arriving in any of the 54 countries that have signed up.

Previously, the Warsaw Convention awarded passengers only 12 per kilogram of luggage lost or damaged. This cost guideline was set in 1929.

For passengers such as BBC Radio 4’s Money Box listener Andrew, the previous rules seemed hopelessly outdated in compensating him for his stolen digital camera.

“As the camera - that had cost me 600 - was weighing less than one kilogram, British Midland offered me 12.78. It was insulting.”

A spokesperson from the Association of British Travel Agents said the new rules are a “welcome improvement”. But travellers should not relax all caution when handing over their bags.

Industry Affairs Advisor at the Air Transport Users Council, James Freemantle has concerns over whether or not airlines will actually pay up.

“Airlines are likely to want to have proof of purchase of items or bags that have been lost or stolen. This is going to cause arguments between passengers and airlines.”

Many passengers will simply not have receipts for the contents of their bags, which would make it difficult to get compensation for clothes, toiletries and other everyday items.

The advice from Mr Freemantle is to keep receipts for any item that you buy to take away with you.

Travellers are however more likely to keep receipts for valuable items.
But in practice, Mr Freemantle said people could still end up with a dispute.

“Airlines may try to say that they are not liable for valuable items. But, the legislation makes no exceptions, therefore they are liable for items such as cameras,” he said.

In the event of such a dispute, the airline would be contravening the Convention and passengers should contact the Air Transport Users Council.

One bag in every 100 goes missing. If it happens to you the advice is to report it immediately at the lost baggage desk. Any damage would also be inspected and noted there.

Passengers are then required to fill in a Property Irregularity Report detailing the extent of loss or damage, and the value of goods affected.

Only once this form is handed in have you made a claim. You are likely to need to provide proof of purchase for all items that you claim for.

If the luggage simply does not arrive, a claim will only be made for delayed baggage at that point.

Belongings are not officially “lost” until 21 days have passed without them being returned. Once it is declared “lost”, you then have seven days to submit a claim.

What happens next remains to be seen. With margins becoming narrower in an increasingly competitive industry, the additional cost will be hard for airlines to absorb.

While the Montreal Convention is undoubtedly an improvement, Mr Freemantle recommended that all travellers take out insurance that specifically covers for baggage loss or damage.

BBC Radio 4’s Money Box was broadcast on Saturday, 3 July, 2004, at 1204 BST.

News - The year in review: April to June

In the second of a four-part series, BBC News Online Scotland’s Steve Brocklehurst looks back at some of the major events in 2002.

Protests against the war in Iraq continued in April and one its most outspoken opponents was Glasgow Kelvin MP George Galloway.

In an interview for Abu Dhabi TV, the Labour MP described Prime Minister Tony Blair and US President George Bush as “wolves” for committing the “crime” of military action against Iraq.

He accused Mr Blair and Mr Bush of lying to the armed forces about the likely length of the war and argued that the war was illegal.

Just over two weeks after the conflict began Scottish regiments led the advance into the southern Iraqi city of Basra.

Troops from the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards and the Black Watch were at the heart of the “liberation” of Iraq’s second city.

However, taking control of the country after the war was to prove far more difficult.

Back at home, faith in the good work performed by charities was rocked when a Scottish breast cancer organisation was banned from operating.

The bank accounts of Breast Cancer Research (Scotland) were frozen when a judge heard that only 1.5m of the 13.2m it raised went to good causes.

The Scottish Executive was criticised for failing to regulate charities despite a report recommending such a move three years ago.

Communities Minister Margaret Curran pledged to appoint a regulator to oversee charities, although she would not be drawn on a timescale.

Unseasonably warm weather in April had fire crews across Scotland at full stretch tackling blazes which destroyed thousands of acres of forest and moorland.

Firefighters in Ayrshire worked round the clock to tackle a forest fire near Darvel - the biggest of its kind in the area for decades.

Two moor fires on the Western Isles at Barvas Moor and Leverburgh also caused problems.

In its drive to increase efficiency, Scottish Water cut a further 900 jobs in April.

The publicly owned body said it needed to cut jobs to meet its industry regulator’s recommendations.

A report in The Economist magazine a short time later said that Scottish water was the most expensive in the UK.

Businesses were the worst affected, collectively paying 190m more than their counterparts south of the border, it said.

Scottish Water said its prices were higher because of an investment programme and added that prices were much higher in England during the 1990s.

According to the report, water bills in Scotland have increased by 94% in real terms over the last decade and by 22% in England.

On 1 May, the Scottish public went to the polls to select MSPs for the Holyrood parliament for the second time.

Independent candidates and the smaller parties were the big winners as the political landscape changed.

It was the Greens, who increased from one MSP to seven, and the Scottish Socialists, who went from a single member to six seats, who had most reason to celebrate.

Retired GP Jean Turner recorded the first big shock of the night when she unseated Labour MSP Brian Fitzpatrick in Strathkelvin and Bearsden.

The independent candidate was campaigning against the closure of Stobhill Hospital.

The Scottish Socialists started the new parliamentary session with protests during the swearing in of newly-elected MSPs at Holyrood.

Colin Fox sang Robert Burns’ egalitarian “A Man’s A Man for A’ That” as his protest and fellow socialist MSP Rosie Kane had written “My oath is to the people” on the palm of her hand, which she held up as she took the affirmation.

Green MSP Patrick Harvie also ruffled a few feathers by seeking support for plans to give gay and straight cohabiting couples the same rights as people who are married.

He wants to establish a civil ceremony - like a register office wedding - to allow them to formally register their partnerships and give them legal rights and responsibilities.

The rights would include the same treatment in tax affairs, welfare benefits, insurance, property and legacies as married couples.

Agreement on a coalition deal between Labour and the Liberal Democrats took a long time to achieve.

The Lib Dems were determined not to enter into an agreement until Labour had given commitments on a number of key issues.

The party leaders reached an agreement which includes commitment to a key Lib Dem goal of voting reform for council elections and Labour’s desire for a hard line on youth crime.

Other Lib Dem pledges taken on board included free eye and dental checks and a review of Skye Bridge tolls.

Jack McConnell, as leader of the largest party in the new Scottish Parliament, was confirmed as first minister.

At Westminster, Alistair Darling took over responsibility for Scottish interests following the departure of Helen Liddell as Scottish secretary.

The Scotland Office and Wales Office were merged into a new department of Constitutional Affairs, headed by Lord Falconer.

Initially, Downing Street said the post of Scottish Secretary would be abolished but then backtracked and said Mr Darling, who is also UK transport secretary, will now have two titles.

Elsewhere, comedian Billy Connolly, singer Sydney Devine and swimmer Alison Sheppard were among the Scots recognised in the Queen’s Birthday Honours list.

Painters Elizabeth Blackadder and Jack Vetrianno were also honoured - along with a tea lady from Glasgow and a school janitor in Angus.

Shotts jail in Lanarkshire was once again the scene of major disturbance as about 35 inmates were involved in rioting in the National Induction Centre.

The riot in the centre, where all inmates sentenced to 10 years or more serve their first 12 months, was brought under control after about nine hours.

The troubled electronics industry in Scotland took another blow when mobile phone company Motorola closed its South Queensferry factory, near Edinburgh, with the loss of 300 jobs.

It came two years after the closure of its operation at Bathgate in West Lothian, which employed more than 3,000 people.

At the High Court in Glasgow, a mother admitted killing her daughter and severely injuring another child in a hammer attack.

Ann Dunn, 36, pleaded guilty to the culpable homicide of five-year-old Erin Gilmour.

The court heard that the child’s skull was fractured by more than a dozen blows to the head in the attack at their home in Stonehouse, Lanarkshire, in September last year.

She was ordered to be detained at a high-security mental hospital without limit of time.

A cull of hedgehogs in the Western Isles caused outraged protesters from across the UK to travel to North Uist in an attempt to save the threatened creatures.

The cull plan was drawn up by Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) with the aim of limiting the number of hedgehogs on the islands because they eat the eggs of rare birds.

SNH planned to cull about 200 hedgehogs from 18 square miles of land in the first phase of its operation but it got off to a slow start as it found the creatures very difficult to trace.

The body of a Scottish woman feared drowned after a canoe accident in Peru in March was found by fishermen a month after she disappeared.

Bridget Riedl-Laing, 26, originally from Cupar in Fife, was swept away after the canoe she and her family were in capsized in strong currents.

Her Austrian husband Rupert and three children, Yannik, four, Fabio, two, and Olivia, one, managed to get to safety.

Employees of a Scottish engineering firm were left without a pension after their employer went into receivership with a massive hole in its final salary scheme.

Blyth & Blyth was taken over in a management buy-out - but the new firm had no responsibility for the old pension scheme.

This meant that 150 staff who had not retired by the time the company went into receivership stood to lose everything.

The independent trustee brought in for the scheme described the case as the “most distressing and difficult” he had ever dealt with.

Thousands of heartbroken Celtic fans made the long journey home after their team’s defeat in the Uefa Cup final in Seville.

It was a night of mixed emotions for the Glasgow team and their fans as the team twice equalised after FC Porto went ahead, only for the Portuguese side to secure the winning goal in extra time.

There were tears among many of the Celtic fans and those watching at home but also pride in the team’s performance.

An estimated 80,000 fans travelled to Seville for the game and Strathclyde Police said their Spanish colleagues informed them that there had not been a single arrest in Seville on match day.

Still with football, Falkirk FC missed out on promotion to the Scottish Premier League after a vote of the 12 clubs went against them.

The first division champions were denied a move up to the top flight because they did not have a stadium which could accommodate 10,000 supporters.

Edinburgh woman Susan Hamilton was found guilty of endangering a young girl’s life by poisoning her with salt.

The court was told that the victim - who is now aged 11 - has been left permanently brain damaged.

In March 2000 she was admitted to hospital in a serious condition after collapsing on the floor of her bathroom.

They called in the police, believing that an overdose of salt must have been given deliberately.

Four members of the notorious Haney family were given jail sentences totalling 33 years for large scale heroin dealing.

Margaret “Big Mags” Haney, 60, was identified as the controller of the operation and jailed for 12 years.

She ran a thriving drugs operation supplying heroin from council flats in Lower Bridge Street, Stirling.

A drug dealing reign of terror was brought to an end after six men from Belfast were jailed.

The judge handed out sentences totalling more than 60 years to the gang, who sought to terrify local people on the Calders housing estate in Edinburgh.

The leader of the gang, David McLeave, 26, was found guilty of serious assault and drug dealing and was sentenced to 14 years.

The gang claimed to be attached to the paramilitary Ulster Volunteer Force and used extreme violence to protect their drug turf.

A police investigation has never found any links with Northern Ireland paramilitaries.

A drunk driver who caused the deaths of three members of a family in the Highlands was jailed for 10 years.

Justin Elder, 29, from Inverness, hit the Braithwaite family from Yorkshire as they walked in the fishing village of Gairloch on a summer afternoon last year.

At the High Court in Edinburgh, Elder, who had drunk eight pints of lager and two vodkas before the accident, pleaded guilty to culpable homicide.

The High Court in Perth heard how five-year-old Danielle Reid, whose body was found in a weighted sack in the Caledonian Canal in Inverness, was killed by her mother’s boyfriend.

Lee Gaytor, 25, pleaded guilty at the High Court in Perth to murdering Danielle at a house in Argyll Street, Inverness.

The child’s mother, Tracy Reid, and Gaytor’s brother Christopher, admitted perverting the course of justice by helping to dispose of the body.

On the last day of June, the murder of 14-year-old girl Jodi Jones shocked the Midlothian community of Easthouses, near Dalkeith.

Jodi’s body was found on a woodland path at the back of the Newbattle Community High School.

Despite extensive police operations, nobody has been charged with the brutal murder of the teenager.

News - Have Your Say

Customers of insurance firm More Than will soon see their house building insurance premiums rocket. In future all of its customers will have to insure for a 400,000 rebuild, whatever the real cost.

What do you think about rising insurance premiums? Do you think the consumer gets a fair deal?

About 10 years ago, when you had to insure through your mortgage company, with automatic annual infation my property insurance value had increased to 125,000 but the actual value was about 85,000.

I managed to get hold of a surveyer’s data booklet which gave rebuilding costs. and they came out at 80,000.

Firstly my provider said they never index down, but after an almighty row they agreed to reduce the insurance value to 85,000, therefore reducing my premium by 25%.

The insurers always seem to pull this fast one about rebuilding costs being higher, but with the high cost of land, even allowing for site clearance, rebuilding always seems to be less that the actual value of the house.

Kevin Rayner

I am a simple person with simple needs. I have held a driving licence for coming up to seven years, with no driving or criminal convictions. So why do the insurance companies insist I pay more than the cost of my car for a fire and theft premium?
Anon

How does one find the rebuilding cost of ones house for buildings insurance without paying a surveyor? The insurance companies will not tell you.

Some of them have said that there is a procedure, but they do not seem to know what it is. Some say they have a leaflet, but when pressed do not know if it is accurate.

I measured my house to find its square footage, but the insurance advisor did not even know if one should allow for the upstairs or just the house’s footprint!

It will not commit to a figure, but if you give a figure and it is incorrect, you are in the wrong and will be under-insured.
Stephen May

We live by a river and unhappily have been the victims of floods. In 2000 we decided we could not afford flood cover because of a massive increase in the premiums demanded.

Our provider agreed to give us cover excluding flood damage for about 600 a year. Our renewal is due in February and we have been notified that the premium would be 2,188.

We have had flood defences installed, but it declined to reinstate flood cover. It has not given us any clear explanation for this huge increase other than it was a re-rating.

I have asked for the matter to be referred to head office but this could well take more time than we have left before renewal.
Martin Husband

Disclaimer: The BBC may edit your comments and cannot guarantee that all e-mails will be published.

The comments we publish are not necessarily the views of the BBC but will reflect the balance of views we have received.

It is helpful if contributors state if they work for any organisation relevant to an issue discussed.

News - How to start a firm from home

Starting a business from home is a great way to avoid having to rent an office or other premises.

However, as small business expert George Derbyshire explains, there are a number of things to remember if you want to give your new firm the best chance of success.

Where is the best place to find information on starting up a small business from home?

I would like to know about tax implications, marketing, and anything I should look out for. Thank you.

ANSWER

George Derbyshire, chief executive of the National Federation of Enterprise Agencies

However, in general terms, the areas you will need to address when you work from home are as follows.

The most important thing is to decide whether you are forming a limited company, or whether you will run your new business on a self-employed basis.

You are allowed to be employed in your day job and self-employed in your new business at home at the same time.

The only legal requirement is to declare your intention to the local HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) office.

It is easy to register as self-employed. You can go online at HMRC’s website and it is all fully explained.

A limited company is a more expensive option and your decision for going down this route would depend very much on the possible turnover you may have and your total tax situation.

You will be required to complete two forms, which get you registered and start your Class 2 National Insurance payments (currently 2.10/week).

They will want this to go “direct debit” from a bank account and, although it is not a legal requirement, you should have a separate bank account to run the business through, especially if you have existing employment and other forms of making money.

Legally, that is all you need to do to get started, unless you expect to earn above the VAT threshold (currently 61,000 annually). If that is the case, you will have to register for VAT.

Look on the internet and other sources to check no-one else is trading under the same name as you.

If you are accepting money for services, then you will need to be insured on a public liability basis.

On any publicly-facing website you run, you will need to consider disclaimers and terms and conditions.

You may also need to contact your local council to ask about planning permission.

If you are unlikely to be causing disturbance to your neighbours through the operation of the business, there should not be a problem, but it also depends on the terms of tenancy/ownership of your property.

You will also need to inform your home insurance company that you are operating a business, as failure to do so may result in your policy being voided in the event of a claim.

Think about who will be answering the phone. If you use your phone for both domestic and business, how does this affect your credibility? Who will answer it, will a message be passed on etc?

There are certain benefits of offsetting some of your domestic costs against the business, if you are using an appropriate room on a permanent basis.

Have you got space to store surplus materials, if appropriate? These are bound to accumulate. Will they be safe and secure?

For more specific advice relevant to your business, you should contact your local Enterprise Agency. Many of them can offer a free consultation session.

You can search for your nearest agency on the National Federation of Enterprise Agency (NFEA) website, or by calling 01234 831623.

You can also ask a question online, which is sent to a local business adviser, on the NFEA’s Small Business Advice website.

News - Sewer saga

Householders in the South West could end up with higher water bills if Government plans to change the ownership of sewerage systems go ahead.

DEFRA says half the properties across the country are connected to private sewers of one kind or another and it wants the water companies to become responsible for them.

The Government said the results of that showed a high level of support for transferring ownership to the water companies.

Keith Richards, Head of Regulation for the company, says at the moment it is responsible for 9000 km of sewer.

“We should have sufficient time to consider the costs of the adoption” he said, “such as bringing those assets up to scratch and the ongoing costs so that we can explain to our customers what the impact would be on our water and sewerage bills.”

OFWAT says initial estimates give a range of annual bill increases of between 3 and 11 across the nine water companies in England.

The Liberal Democrat MP for Torbay Adrian Sanders is concerned it could be more in the South West.

“We need some clarity about what the cost is actually going to be for the people in the south west area” he says.

“If the costs are going to be greater in the South West then there should be a different mechanism that reflects that and supports people in terms of restricting the charges that can be levied in the south west.”

DEFRA says the new system will bring clarity for householders who will understand what they are responsible for.

But those who represent water consumers in the South West want more thought going into the proposals.

Charles Howeson, the South West Chairman of the Consumer Council for Water is sceptical.

“I think deeper research is necessary. There will be public consultation in June for a period, and that is when this needs to be thought through very properly.

Two years ago the ground floor and garden of Dave Large’s home in Paignton flooded seven times in two months.

A collapsed pipe below his property had prevented rainwater from escaping. South West Water said because it did not own the drain it would not have to repair it.

Eventually Mr Large’s insurance company paid the thousands of pounds it cost to repair what was an undesignated sewer.

Join Rebecca Wills and Chris Rogers in the Politics Show on Sunday 20 May 2007 at 12:00 BST on BBC One.

Disclaimer: The BBC may edit your comments and cannot guarantee that all emails will be published.

News - Pretty vacant skyscrapers?

One of London’s tallest and perhaps best-loved skyscrapers, the Swiss Re Tower, has been a resounding critical success. But it’s also standing half-empty.

Think of ground-breaking, sky scraping architecture and Manhattan or Kuala Lumpur spring to mind. London does not even make it on to the shortlist.

But that’s about to change. By 2010 the capital will house Europe’s tallest building and a raft of competitors, all tall, all innovative.

The first of these structures has already thrust its way on to the London skyline - the much hyped Swiss Re building, or Erotic Gherkin, as it’s more colourfully labelled.

The building certainly makes the boldest of statements and has picked up architectural accolades aplenty, including the prestigious Stirling prize.

Looking up at it, it’s bizarre to think, given its elegant curves, that the tower has only one curved piece of glass -the one at its very pinnacle. Otherwise all the panes are straight.

The owners, insurance company Swiss Re, occupy a quarter of a million square feet, but that leaves a space of similar size which is entirely vacant. Astronomical City rents mean the company is foregoing 100 per working minute.

So why won’t it rent and will this commercial anomaly jeopardise the planned skyscrapers, which may have been granted planning permission, but have not yet left the drawing board.

It seems that the owners misjudged the demand for office space when the tower was under construction.

Graham Coles, Vice-President of the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors believes “they packaged up the space in units of 100,000 square ft which seemed a good idea at the time, but when the building was finished, the demand for rentals of that size had evaporated.”

It has taken a significant rethink to carve up the space into smaller units, but the problem of anticipating demand is not a new one. Peter Rogers, founding director of Stanhope Property Development says that constant research is required regarding location and tenants.

Even so a market can change enormously in the several years it takes to go from drawing to brick and mortar - or should I say steel and glass -reality. Especially so, as the commercial property market in London is notoriously cyclical.

Another factor for the vacancy is Swiss Re’s insistence that anyone renting space in their tower should be of the highest pedigree.

Peter Rees, planning officer at the Corporation of London thinks their inflexibility is understandable. “If you were renting a room in your own house and the market was a little soft, you wouldn’t take anyone. So it is for Swiss Re.”

He points out that when a building houses an owner occupier, the demands are more stringent, but equally, the architecture can be more adventurous.

Mr Rees draws a parallel between the Gherkin and the Victorian head office of the Prudential, which at the time was considered outrageously different. Had it been built as a purely commercial development, rather than as a home for the insurance giant, Mr Rees feels it would have been far less innovative.

But the equation between innovation and owner-occupancy seems to break down with the new towers on the horizon. London Bridge Tower, or the Shard of Glass (each of the new constructs comes complete with exotic sobriquet) is anything but conservative.

It will be the tallest building in Europe and its pinnacle will consist of sculpted panes of glass reaching up to the sky.

Commercially it will also be breaking new ground. The building will be a virtual city with office space, shops, flats and a hotel contained within the pyramid.

It sounds a risky enterprise and it is. Potentially costing up to 1bn, the developers told us that they are unable to go ahead unless 35-40% of the building is pre-let.

Others we talked to thought it would be a tall order and doubted whether it would ever go ahead.

The Heron tower is another developer-led project. Fred Pilbrow of architects Kohn Pederson Fox Associates told us that the way they are seeking to avoid the commercial pitfalls suffered by the Gherkin is to segment the space into small flexible spaces.

“We are building villages of three floors each which will make it unlike any other large tower in London. The space will be far more sociable.”

Sociable or not, the new towers are being scrutinised for how they will affect the London skyline. English Heritage’s Philip Davies is at pains to point out it has nothing against tall buildings per se, but that they mustn’t interfere with “strategic views” of St Paul’s Cathedral.

Nor should they affect the space on the ground adversely. Mr Davies believes” You have to be very careful with a tall building as it can suck out the life of a City for generations to come.”

And yet, given the space restrictions on the ground - especially in the square mile - it seems logical for buildings to get taller and taller. London’s Mayor Ken Livingstone thinks the City learned its lesson when large companies started to desert it for Canary Wharf.

In any case, the economic argument is only half the tale. There is more to these towers than simply rent, yields and capital value.

Developers, planners and architects alike believe that for London to maintain its image as one of the key capitals of the world it must have ground breaking architecture.

But as George Ferguson, president of the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) puts it ” that does not mean that London becomes an architectural zoo. What we need is not height for the sake of it, but fantastic structures that people can enjoy, especially at ground level.”

Only then will the social and commercial elements come together and another Gherkin pickle be avoided.

Have Your Say: Flood insurance

As the flood waters recede in parts of England it has become clear tens of thousands of homes have been affected.

We asked if you had made an insurance claim linked to the recent floods and who you thought should foot the bill for the uninusred. This debate is now closed.

If taxpayers' money is used to help flood victims, the same percentage should be paid to everyone affected. Those who are properly insured would then receive a payout on their policy, less the government funding. This way those who pay for insurance will not feel unfairly treated, and we will all benefit from the fact that future insurance premiums will not have to rise quite so much as they would do otherwise.

A local developer who built on field that was known to flood, and where there was a spring, is now offering to repair the houses that recently flooded. I completely agree with the Nottingham MP on Money Box that developers should have to insure against flood for the 20 years - also maybe personal liability on the council who gave approval.
Mike Davis, East Yorkwhire

People who don't bother to buy building insurance should be made to pay back the money that the tax payer lends to them.
Jane Woods

If householders wish to spend their money on beer, holidays or plasma tvs that is then their problem. We sensible people should not pay for their stupidity! The government should not allow building on flood plains! Equally stupid!
Mike of Swansea

Isn't it amazing that when an uninsured person suffers a loss individually they have to cope on their own but when it's part of a more generalised event then the taxpayer is expected to bail them out? Those who choose the benefits of spending their money on something other than insurance should not expect the taxpayer to pay when things go wrong. Those who buy houses that cannot be insured because of an unacceptable flood risk should have done their homework before the purchase and will also have benefited from the lower price they paid for it in the first place so I'm afraid I don't feel any responsibility to them either. Councils on the other hand probably do need taxpayer assistance to reinstate damage to local infrastructure.
A Dell, Glasgow

If my car is at the side of the road with no insurance and it's hit by a passing truck then it's my tough luck. if these people have not bothered to insure their property then again it's their tough luck. They knew the risks, global warming is happening and if you don't live on the top of a hill, then get your home insured.
Andrew McCallig, Cumbria

I pay house insurance for the risk to my property, not other people's property. Those who have chosen not to have house insurance made that choice. I do not see why I should pay for their property damage. Perhaps the people who should pay are the developers, builders and individual council members who have allowed these properties to be built on flood plains in the first place.
SRB, Abergale

I pay just over 300 a year for contents and building insurance. Why should I as a tax paying pensioner - 200 a month tax - pay towards those who didn't bother to take out insurance cover but still can afford cigarettes, drink and bingo?
Bob Baker, Clacton On Sea

I spent an austere childhood as my parents made financial sacrifices to pay for a mortgage, insurance and pensions. I lived an austere life as I chose to have a mortgage and insurance and made pension arrangements and now pay not inconsiderable taxes and have no wish to see them diverted to those who have chosen not to suffer such austerity but think that I should subsidise their financial chickens coming home to roost.
Anne Wheelhouse, Hawkhurst, Kent

Whilst some flood victims should have given a higher priority to insuring their property, I believe we should show compassion to people facing total ruin. Let us not forget it is government policies such as immigration that required the vast number of houses to be built on flood plains and it surely follows that it is their duty to ensure the rivers and drains are capable of protecting them. Don't call it an Act of God, it is failed government for which we must all take responsibility.
R Harris, London

Why should the wise pay for the foolish? Their bills will probably be much the same as the premiums paid by the insured over many years.
Douglas Cook, Cockermouth, Cumbria

An uninsured house holder in a flood area may get a grant from the flood fund. But would an uninsured house holder get any help if they had similar loses on an individual scale, say a fire in May?
Lane, Nottingham

As someone who is fully insured I find the comments by those moaning about people's lack of insurance miserable. Many people cannot afford insurance. Even if they have plasma TVs - so what. They are still deserving of our help. In my experience, insurance companies do anything in their power not to pay out. I have twice had to employ a solicitor to ensure they pay up. People do not have the money to take these companies on.
Simon Hutchings, Ottery St Mary

It seems to be that we are paying for everyone who makes a dubious decision these days. I don't really feel that flooding is my problem and I certainly don't want to have to pay to bail these people out, although I do feel sorry for them. Perhaps people who live in areas where flooding is going to be a problem should be paying into their own fund to cover costs in such an eventuality. I can see my bank account being raided by the government, yet again, to pay for this and it's not on.
Judy, Liverpool

I'm not surprised that some properties are uninsurable. Over the last few decades, building has taken place on plots with too high a risk of flooding and/or subsidence. The most worrying thing though is that this process still continues today.
Chris Grey, Guildford

I for one am heartily tired of people who chose not to insure their goods now implying it is someone else's fault and that someone else (ie the taxpayer) should bail them out. I would be pretty sure they all have all the usual expensive goods, and large TVs, DVDs and stereos etc. Everyone regards these things as essential but not all want to pay the premiums to insure them. Well those of us who pay insurance should not have to bail out those who chose not to.
Rob Bacon, London

As someone who lost their roof in the Birmingham tornado, I felt very lucky in having the insurers agree to a new roof fairly quickly (within three weeks). However, we had to live in the house for over six months from July to January with tarpaulin for a roof, winds whistling through and further damage from rain and the work (ceilings collapsing in the bedrooms and bathroom). The insurers eventually paid 63,000 out of a total bill approaching 72,000, so we were 9,000 out-of-pocket in addition to the stress of living in a building site. But we still counted ourselves lucky compared to many of our neighbours who had insurers dragging out assessments, builders who did shoddy work, and landlords with no insurance.
Mike Cummins, Birmingham

News - California fire residents return home

News - Property searches in terror alert

News - UK voters’ panel: Gary Watson

News - Lost luggage payouts increase

News - The year in review: April to June

News - Have Your Say

News - How to start a firm from home

News - Sewer saga

News - Pretty vacant skyscrapers?

Have Your Say: Flood insurance

Recently

Categories

Archives

Recently Written

Monthly Archives

Blogroll

Find It

Admin

Design