Grand Designs 16 September

[John V]

That is the first time I have read that article........what ever he was drinking, I'll have a pint......I have never read such a load of preposterous tripe !!!

He certainly wasn't writing about the heap of Sh*** that was in the picture

The whole thing was a testament to how NOT to do a conversion, in the design (?) construction and choice (?) of material.

It was towed from the beach by the tug "Pochard" and towed to Bell Wharfe at Lea-on-Sea

I understand that sometime later it was taken away and had the "additions" removed and turned back into a lighter

[nb Innisfree]

I did like the clifftop shed on George Clarkes Amazing Spaces last night, no plans, just designed as he went along.

[RockSodem]

That is the first time I have read that article........what ever he was drinking, I'll have a pint......I have never read such a load of preposterous tripe !!!

He certainly wasn't writing about the heap of Sh*** that was in the picture

The whole thing was a testament to how NOT to do a conversion, in the design (?) construction and choice (?) of material.

It was towed from the beach by the tug "Pochard" and towed to Bell Wharfe at Lea-on-Sea

I understand that sometime later it was taken away and had the "additions" removed and turned back into a lighI

I only realised it was a satirical piece reading it the second time. Not a very good one and somewhat pointless I might add

[FadeToScarlet]

That is the first time I have read that article........what ever he was drinking, I'll have a pint......I have never read such a load of preposterous tripe !!!

He certainly wasn't writing about the heap of Sh*** that was in the picture

The whole thing was a testament to how NOT to do a conversion, in the design (?) construction and choice (?) of material.

It was towed from the beach by the tug "Pochard" and towed to Bell Wharfe at Lea-on-Sea

I understand that sometime later it was taken away and had the "additions" removed and turned back into a lighter

I think the article is meant to be a sarcastic piss take...

[John V]

I think the article is meant to be a sarcastic piss take...

 

 

DOH !!!

[John V]

Grand Designs by mudlarker2, on Flickr

Grand Designs by mudlarker2, on Flickr

[br4k3s]

Remember seeing this episode, was a bit of a disaster from the outset as I remember had low funds [£15 or there about's] sourced materials secondhand, had 2 or 3 different builders, fell out with moorings owners, moved to estuary moorings and could only axis via flood tide, as unpowered had to be towed, believed did move aboard, then at end of prog Ch4 and owner not allowed axis to film final scenes of project,

Just add's weight to age old advise sort moorings then worry about boat, still applies today even with increased moorings available, was a few years ago though.

[blackrose]

There is nothing making him take the money if complying with the conditions makes him feel infantalised...

You mean that there is nothing forcing him to take the money?

 

No I suppose not, apart from it being his money and we all need to live.

 

I was simply making a comment on the programme and just found it a bit odd that 5 decades after being originally imposed (for good reason), he still has to live under those financial conditions for a reason which wasn't explained in the programme. Just my feeling, not based on any detailed knowledge of his financial affairs.

 

I'm not entirely sure what point you're trying to make about a programme you didn't actually see.

Edited September 19, 2015 by blackrose

[John V]

Snip< Just add's weight to age old advise sort moorings then worry about boat, still applies today even with increased moorings available, was a few years ago though.

 

There were some (not many) moorings around for a boat that big but I have been told, people said "I 'aint having that pile of....... here".

 

(A lot of us were quite sorry when it broke the mooring off Southend, it was there for a LONG time. In rough seas it was a handy daymark for the mooring buoys in Hadleigh Ray)

[Arthur Marshall]

 

I was simply making a comment on the programme and just found it a bit odd that 5 decades after being originally imposed (for good reason), he still has to live under those financial conditions for a reason which wasn't explained in the programme. Just my feeling, not based on any detailed knowledge of his financial affairs.

 

I think the problem was that he'd fried his brains on drugs in his youth, and brains once seriously fried don't really ever recover (I've been in bands with people like that...). Looks like he had understanding trustees and has been happy throughout his life, loves boats and now has a good house by a river for the tail end of his life and I'm not sure which of us could ever ask for more!

Apart from a crow's nest, obviously.

[NigelMoore]

The one part of that programme which rather put me off a presenter I have always enjoyed very much, was the parting comment that the success of the building could be measured by its ability to persuade a lifelong boater that life aground was better than life afloat.

I understand [i hope] what he was really meaning to say, but it will take some time to forgive the remark.

[Peter X]

I think the problem was that he'd fried his brains on drugs in his youth, and brains once seriously fried don't really ever recover (I've been in bands with people like that...). Looks like he had understanding trustees and has been happy throughout his life, loves boats and now has a good house by a river for the tail end of his life and I'm not sure which of us could ever ask for more!

Apart from a crow's nest, obviously.

Yes, I got the impression that the trustees were probably good people trying to act in his best interests. Maybe they should have intervened more, to stop him paying the original builders too much up front? Anyone willing to let him spend some of his money to live on boats most of his life couldn't be all bad!

 

Assuming that the trustees were originally appointed for life, I wonder whether the rules under which they operate would oblige them to spread the money out over his lifetime, keeping some back for his old age? If they handed the remainder over now and walked away, and he then blew it and became penniless, the trustees could be seen as negligent.

[TheBiscuits]

Yes, I got the impression that the trustees were probably good people trying to act in his best interests. Maybe they should have intervened more, to stop him paying the original builders too much up front? Anyone willing to let him spend some of his money to live on boats most of his life couldn't be all bad!

If they have been used to paying chandlers bills for decades, why would they think they were overpaying builders?

[MHS]

If they have been used to paying chandlers bills for decades, why would they think they were overpaying builders?

You can however buy a lot of Elsan Blue for £80k