MSN Money consumer champion

Photo: www.societybrides.co.uk/

Storm in a DD cup

Mon, 21 Jul 2008 07:57:50 GMT

Forget the credit crunch, Equitable Life and soaring petrol costs. The debate buxom women everywhere are most concerned about is the 'storm in a DD cup' at Marks & Spencer.

The high street favourite sells around 20million bras a year in the UK, that's 45 every minute. But it has recently padded its costs with a £2 surcharge on bras above DD cup, saying the cost of the extra work and material justifies the higher price.

Now a Facebook group - Bras4Justice - has been set up to lobby M&S over its policy. Campaigners say that the pricing is discriminating against the more well-endowed and point out that the other items of clothing, such as T-shirts and trousers, are the same price regardless of size. "If you don't charge a size 20 woman more for a pair of trousers, then why should you pay more for an E cup bra?," says one curvaceous contributor.

I can see that more work goes into making a bra than a T-shirt, or even trousers. But what would the alternative be? To spread the extra costs of the big bras across all bras?

Michelle Mone who owns the Ultimo lingerie range also charges more (£3) for bigger sizes and has a more detailed explanation for the costs: "From a technical aspect, when you go up from a DD cup to a G cup, it takes three times longer to develop than an A-D cup," she told the Evening Standard. "It costs more for the wires and straps and then there's the shipping. It costs an extra 25p to ship bras above DD. If God has given you that gift, that is the price you have to pay," she says.

Is this discrimination or is it perfectly acceptable for retailers to pass on the extra cost? Leave your comments below....

Photo: Marks & Spencer

Bookmark with:

Digg

Shrinking groceries - your culprits

Thu, 17 Jul 2008 20:53:02 GMT

Since my last blog highlighting the US trend of companies selling us smaller products for the same price - known as short-sizing - the claims of UK shrinkage have been coming in thick and fast from msn users. You see, size does matter. So here's your supermarket sweep of shrinking items.... Thanks for all your feedback. Let's keep the list - and awareness - going. Send me a message or leave a comment below.... Basics...

"Tescos have changed the packages for their Bakery "Tiger" bread - you now get 600g instead of 800g."
Shredded Wheat - many of you pointed out that there are 27 in a pack instead of 30. All for the same price.
"Muller Vitality yogurts were 150g they have just shrunk to 125g and are still at the same price."
"My wife used to buy Onken Lite fruit Mousses. These are now 1/3 smaller but are still the same price."
"Organic Weetabix has recently reduced it's 'biscuit' size. Because it's sold as a multipack, there's no need to put a weight on the pack, but the nutritional information has changed and the pack is slightly smaller - but there are still 24 biscuits in a pack and that's how it's sold - very cunning!"
"The obvious one is Pringles. They still come in the same size tubes but now hold 170g rather than 200g. There are still a few flavours with 200g in the tubes but most are now 170g."
"Tesco sea salt that was in a 500g container was 93p is now sold in a 350g and is the same price."
"Streamline jam was 480g for £1.19 is now 350g and is the same price."

Meat, fish, poultry, ready meals...

"Tesco barbecue wings used to be 14 pieces--it's now 10."
"I've bought Waitrose minced beef for years and it always used to be 550g but now all their minced meat is 500g for the same or more price."
"ASDA ready meals was 6 for £4 now 5 for £4."
"Birds Eye packs of what used to be 36 fish fingers have shrunk to 30 but the price has stayed the same."
"Tesco changed their battered Cod fillets from 6 packs to 4 packs. They've changed the prices too but the net effect is an increase in price."
"Look out for minced meat; beef, turkey and pork. 500g used to be the standard size but this has dropped to 450g in Asda. I also think salmon fillets have become smaller in Sainsburys but you don't notice because it 2 in a pack so you look at the quantity rather than the overall weight."

Alcohol, soft drinks, water....

"Beer and lager from supermarkets is a culprit. I normally buy cases for cost effectiveness but the case size had already dropped a while ago from 24 to 20 but now it has reduced even further to 18 or 15."
"The beer companies have been at it for ages with bottles. First it was a 24 pack of 330ml then it went to a 20 pack of 300ml, now its packs of 270ml and the price stays the same."
"Strongbow have recently dropped from 18 to 15 cans in a case."
"Tesco own brand cordial that used to be a 1 litre bottle had shrunk down to a 750 ml bottle but gone up in price by 20p."

Non-food...

"There is more water in own brand items such as bath foam and shampoo to keep size and price the same."
"Timotei has just changed the packaging of their product so that the cap is at the bottom - it looks smaller and costs 40p more."
"Toilet rolls are now about three times the diameter and much thinner. The sheets have got smaller and by puffing them up with hot air in manufacture they are not as thick, and there are not so many on the roll."
"Tesco value kitchen roll that I used to get 4 for 99p had shrunk down to just 2 rolls claiming that they are jumbo rolls."
"A cheeky one from Tesco's as the hayfever season got under way..Tescos own brand of hayfever pills..I used to buy a box that lasted a month - one pill per day. One pill per day. The box had 2 blister packs each with 14 pills. NOW.. Same box but only HALF of the spaces are filled with pills.What a waste of packaging, what a bad consumer deal."
"Rennie's is another brand that has shrunk package size. You used to get 96 in a box, now only 72 for the same price. And all this stress is giving me indigestion!"
"Fairy liquid has an offer - buy 2 for £2. If you check the content its gone from 500ml to 400 ml. So we save 50p but lose 200ml."

Biscuits, cakes, sweets, chocolate...

"I am shocked at how small Tracker bars have become, a little like the Wagon Wheel, they seemed so much larger when I was younger!"
"I went to pick up a multi pack of Smarties and it was always a pack of 4 but this time it was a pack of 3. The price was the same though."
Many of you report that Cadburys dairy milk large bars have shrunk from 250g to 230g. "This was cleverly disguised by a simultaneous change in packaging."
There have also been lots of comments about Mars bars - size and quality - but nothing firm on shrinkage for the same or higher cost.

Photo: www.mothercare.com

Bookmark with:

Digg

Are you paying bank charges?

Thu, 17 Jul 2008 08:41:40 GMT

If a bill drops onto your doormat then it's pretty obvious what you are paying for and how much it costs. But with bank charges it's nowhere near as clear. Are you paying them? Any idea how much they cost each month?

Most of us don't according to the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) which this week said the current account market 'is not working well' for customers. Many do not know how much they pay in bank charges and the complexity and lack of transparency of current accounts made it "extremely difficult" for people to compare their account with others.

For something that so quietly creeps into the your list of debits, these charges certainly pack a punch. The OFT says they generated a staggering £8.3 billion for banks in 2006 alone - that's more than the money made from savings and credit cards combined. Incredible. Banks are making £152 a year from every active account, and that 12.6m accounts - 23% of those in use - had incurred at least one insufficient funds charge in 2006. 1.4 million people pay more than £500 a year in bank charges. Are you one of them?

The OFT will now talk to the banks to improve clarity for customers. Surely they can list charges in a 'Janet and John' style crib sheet and show a break down in statements for starters?

"This confirms what we've always argued - that there is no such thing as free banking," says Phil Jones of Which? "Most people have no idea how much they pay for their current account, and the market is uncompetitive. It's a catch-22 situation - people aren't switching because there's little difference between the big banks' current accounts and, because people aren't switching, banks have little incentive to compete for customers."

The British Bankers' Association (BBA) said the report had only looked at revenue and not considered the cost of running a current account. Its chief executive, Angela Knight, insisted the market was "very competitive" and dismissed the OFT's £152 average annual charge figure as "contrived" on the BBC Radio 4 Today programme: "Frankly, you have only got to just pick up your literature, go and look in the branch, have a look on the website and you will find that everything there is clear. Yes, you can incur charges if you do things without making arrangements first, but do you really want to pay for ATM use, pay for statements, pay for direct debits in this country? Surely people don't."

Surely Angela Knight does not expect us to believe that it costs £8.3billion a year to cover the cost of the banking blips customers make? No one expects to get an overdraft for free but it seems the difference between reasonable costs (and small profit margin) and the enormous sums being made here is HUGE. Have your say - leave a comment below.....

Bookmark with:

Digg

Do you borrow from your children?

Mon, 14 Jul 2008 07:21:44 GMT

Nothing is more of a turn-off for children than a sentence that begins "When I was young.....". But even as a (relatively) young person, the contrast between my childhood experiences and the today's children increases all the time. After drying up a couple of piles of dishes and tidying my room I was rewarded each week with what to me was the princely sum of 10p. I would head off on my bike to the local shop where it was immediately invested in a copy of Whizzer and Chips and some penny sweets.

Today it was revealed that pocket money is the latest casualty of the credit crunch as parents cut back. But it is hardly surprising given the sums involved. Children receive an average of £8.01 per week in pocket money, an increase of over 600% since 1987, according to new research from Halifax's 20th Anniversary Pocket Money Survey from last year. This figure is 19p less than 2006 and it will be interesting to see what the next set of figures - due in about a week - reveal, not least because research from Axa show that about a fifth of parents have cut the amount that cash they gave to their children in the last six months.

I know it depends on the age of the child and a seven-year-old needs less than a 13-year-old. I like to think that most of them still do chores for their pocket money. By 15 I had a Saturday job to fund my Duran Duran album needs (showing my age, I know).

In the current climate I think we can expect to see parents borrowing from children to cover soaring bills. More than a million parents are thought to have already raided their children's savings accounts in January last year to tide them over after an expensive festive season, according to Yorkshire Bank. Perhaps this habit will take off and the Bank of Mum and Dad could soon be the Bank of Junior.

Have your say.... how much pocket money do you give your children and do they have to do chores? Have you ever dipped into your child's savings account? Do you still borrow from your parents? Leave a comment below.....

Photo: Child of the '80s website

Bookmark with:

Digg

Who is buying your personal information?

Fri, 11 Jul 2008 09:43:11 GMT

We've known for a long time that the electoral roll was being flogged to various companies. And of course government departments such as the DVLA are not immune to such money-making activities. Now finally, someone has called for the council profiteering to end and a ban on the sale of electoral information to direct marketing companies (junk mail firms to you and I) looks likely.

The report from an official inquiry by Information Commissioner Richard Thomas and Dr Mark Walport, director of the Wellcome Trust, has criticised the way councils have been selling the names and addresses of tens of millions of householders to junk mail firms which send out 3billion items of rubbish each year (although perhaps this post is single-handedly keeping Royal Mail going....).

The 'edited' electoral roll currently being sold contains your name and address unless you opt out. There is a a box to tick on the electoral registration card each year but today's report says that the opt-out directions were often written in 'confusing' language, and householders did not realise what they were agreeing to. Everybody has to be on the full electoral register, but this cannot be bought or sold, and is available in paper form only. It is the edited version - containing 15million names (60% of homes) which is sold and should be scrapped.

Information Commissioner Richard Thomas said the proposal amounted to a return to the pre-Internet age, with copies of the electoral roll only available in public libraries and council offices. His report said: 'We feel that selling the edited register is an unsatisfactory way for local authorities to treat personal information. It sends a particularly poor message to the public that personal information collected for something as vital as participation in the democratic process can be sold to anyone for any purpose.' It also said the Information Commissioner should have the power to impose massive fines against companies or government bodies which deliberately or recklessly breach privacy rules.

Hooray to that. Now we just have to hope the government has the sense to implement all the recommendations. Meanwhile....useful links: 10 ways to protect your ID; Mailing Preference Service; Stop Junk Mail Campaign.

Have your say.. are you sick of junk mail? Did you miss the opt-out box on the electoral registration? Should councils be allowed to make money from our records? Leave a comment below...

Bookmark with:

Digg

Eight ways to beat the school holiday price hikes

Tue, 08 Jul 2008 11:18:34 GMT

I seem to remember the government threatening to do something to stop the huge price mark-ups for holidays when children are off school. I think they wanted to discourage money-saving mums and dads from dragging ankle-biters out of lessons during term time. The problem seems to get worse every year.

The latest research from Abbey Credit Cards has found that rates from mid-July to the first few weeks in August - when schools go on holiday - jump by more than half in some foreign resorts, and up to a whopping 162% here in the UK. It seems that regardless of destination or departure airport, holidays taken on the 9 August, when all schools have finished for summer, will be 38% more expensive than holidays taken on the 12 July, when most schools are still open. And once school starts back in September the prices drop off by an average of a third, with some resorts slashing prices by as much as half.

Of course it's not just parents who face higher prices. Those without children have the same problem if they want to travel in late July or August. Here are my eight tips to help you avoid the school holiday price hikes...

1. Fly from the cheapest airport. Regional airports may be more convenient they also attract the highest supplements for charter flights at peak times. The exceptions are flights with no-frills airlines which have a programme of regional fares.
2. Choose your destination carefully - France and Turkey may be cheaper than other parts of Europe. Orlando traditionally sees a jump in summer prices but the weak dollar could balance that out. Consider how far your money will go in each country before you book.
3. Book late. If you are prepared to take a gamble then booking late can pay off if you have some flexibility about when you can travel and where you want to go. Of course this may not appeal if you are potentially letting down your whole family.
4. Book early. In other words, plan for next year now and aim to book by January 2009 to save and get greater choice. Negotiate with hotels and get confirmation of rates in writing to avoid paying more if the price goes up as peak season approaches. Holidays are expected to cost more than ever next year - up to £300 more per family per fortnight. Booking well in advance for ferries and trains is also likely to save you money.
5. Travel late. The last two weeks of the summer holidays at the end of August are usually significantly cheaper than the late-July to mid-August peak. You could save as much as a fifth.
6. Depart midweek. If you can get away mid-week then departing on pretty much any day other than a Friday or Saturday will deliver savings. Many airline websites provide a 'cheapest flight' search option to help.
7. Log on - use comparison websites to research, compare and read reviews from people who have already stayed in the hotels. Hotel websites may have special offers but packages could be cheaper overall so do your sums. Look out for specialist sites such as mousesavers.com which details every type of discount available at Disney resorts.
8. Get the best deals on currency and insurance. This means planning ahead - even a few days before you leave - rather than signing up for last minute rates.

Having trouble getting a good deal for the summer? Please share your money-saving tips and leave your comments below.....

Bookmark with:

Digg

One taxman a week sacked for snooping

Mon, 07 Jul 2008 09:10:59 GMT

How depressing to discover that 600 staff at HMRC have been disciplined in the last two years for snooping on our personal data.

The revelation by Treasury minister Jane Kennedy in a written answer to parliament showed that 192 tax staff had been disciplined last year, 180 in 2006 and 238 in 2005. Apparently 44 people were sacked for snooping over a 10-month period last year - one a week.

Some accessed information on their own friends or family but others accessed personal data for people they simply disliked. In the most serious cases, they sold the information to third parties.

In March last year, Mobolaji Olayinka, an IT consultant, was jailed for stealing more than 1,000 identities from HMRC's central database. He sold on the names, addresses, National Insurance numbers and dates of birth to a gang which made £1.3million from benefits fraud.

The House of Lords recently backed a motion to make the reckless loss or distribution of data a criminal offence. It won't come a moment too soon. But what's to stop the police taking action against the 600 (so far) people caught mis-using government data? Answers on a postcard please.... alternatively have your say by leaving your comments below...

Bookmark with:

Digg

MPs do just what they want with your money

Fri, 04 Jul 2008 07:36:20 GMT

Today I feel like giving myself a nice pay rise. And because we live in a crunchy financial climate, I think I'll award myself some other perks. About £24,000-worth should do the trick. That will bring me into line with our MPs.

Yes, in a so-called democracy, MPs have turned into Marie Antoinettes and voted to keep their £24,000 second home allowances. Rather like a bunch of turkeys voting to ban Christmas. All this while the people of Britain face increasing struggles with soaring bills.

After months of revelations about the nature and extent of what many see as loopholes and abuses of public cash by many MPs, a review by the Commons Members Estimate Committee had recommended the additional costs allowance (ACA) be replaced and greater transparency and audits be imposed.

The rejected proposals: The Committee recommended an overnight expenses allowance capped at £19,600 a year for accommodation. MPs would also have been given a £30-a-day subsistence allowance without receipts, up to a maximum of £4,600 every year. This would have been more tightly controlled and could only have been spent on paying mortgage interest, rent or hotel bills and household bills, putting an end to the so-called "John Lewis list" - the use of public money to pay for items like new kitchens and household goods such as TVs.

MPs have rejected the need to provide receipts for all claims - how this keeps HMRC happy, quite apart from the rest of us, is anyone's guess. Incredibly, MPs had been able to claim up to £250 per item for their second homes without producing receipts - but that threshold was reduced to £25 in April. Perhaps the real crime was that it was kept quiet for so long.

The Committee had also recommended "a robust new system" of financial health checks on MPs offices. There would have been a more thorough auditing system.

What they keep: The John Lewis list - meaning MPs will continue to be free to charge iPods, dishwashers and improvements for their second homes to the public purse.

Instead of a plan for external audits on expenses claims covering up to a quarter of MPs every year, each member will face internal financial checks just once every four years - by which time they could have lost their seat and disappeared into the sunset.

The principle: The sums involved in the new proposals may not have been very different from the ones in force but the freedom of public servants to pick and choose how they use public funds is just wrong. Yes if they truly need a second home (and not all of them do) then it needs furniture but this all needs much greater scrutiny and transparency. What is to stop them claiming the allowance for a second home but telling the taxman it is their main home and avoiding CGT, as has been alleged.

Who did and said what? The vote to keep the Additional Costs Allowance was won by 172 to 144. Some 146 Labour MPs, including 33 Government ministers, voted to keep the allowance and the John Lewis list.

David Cameron and the shadow cabinet voted for the abolition of the John Lewis list.

Gordon Brown claimed he wanted to vote the new reforms in but was kept away by a meeting at Downing Street. More than 30 government ministers opted to keep the ACA, including Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, Culture Secretary Andy Burnham and Northern Ireland Secretary Shaun Woodward.

Labour MP Don Touhig insisted the ACA was necessary. He said: "I think most fair-minded people would accept that the extraordinary situation of an MP needing to live both in his or her constituency and London requires an allowance to support that cost."

Tory Ann Widdecombe, who backed keeping the ACA, said MPs had to "have the guts to stand up for ourselves, to defend the system and say why it is we have that system".

Liberal Democrat Nick Harvey summed it all up nicely: "It was a total own-goal on the part of the House of Commons. An opportunity to put our house in order and be seen to put our house in order has been passed up. "They took all the nice bits of the package but not the ones they didn't like. They took the spoonful of sugar but refused the medicine."

Salaries: Meanwhile, we should be grateful that ministers salaries have been frozen at £138,000 basic and backbenchers decided against giving themselves an above inflation pay rise, opting for 2.25% instead of 3.5% but this does take their basic salaries to £62,558 - more than twice the national average. And 155 MPs did try to force through an above-inflation 4.7% rise for next year.

What do you think? Do MPs deserve the freedom they have voted for or should they be made to account for every penny? Leave your comment below....

Bookmark with:

Digg

Crossing a palm with silver? Read the terms and conditions....

Tue, 01 Jul 2008 19:43:32 GMT

Let's hope they saw it coming....fortune tellers, mediums, tarot readers and astrologers are among those who face new rules on the way they do business. The new Consumer Protection Regulations which came into effect at the end of May have shaken up an area of the law untouched for 40 years and will mean a fairer deal for customers as loopholes are closed and 31 types of sales practices are banned.

Those offering to read palms and tea leaves plus faith healers, mediums and anyone offering other 'mystic' services will have to advise customers that their services are for 'entertainment purposes only' and are 'not scientifically proven'. For the past half-century, 'genuine' mediums have been protected by the 1951 Fraudulent Mediums Act (which, spookily, replaced the 1735 Witchcraft Act. Yikes). In relevant cases, the onus will now be on mediums to prove they did not mislead, coerce or take advantage of any 'vulnerable' consumers. I certainly get the impression that there has been an explosion of websites and phone lines in this market.

But just about any business which conducts sales and marketing will have to take on board the new rules. Some of the outlawed business tactics include using fake closing down sales, false testimonials online and limited-time offers that are then extended. Other banned practices include those especially likely to harm the vulnerable or elderly, such as high pressure sales techniques. The tactic known as 'bait and switch', often employed by electrical retailers will also be banned. This is where a low-price product advertised when it is not available. When the customer asks about the offer he or she is directed to a higher price product instead. 'Flogs' - fake blogs designed to create a buzz around a brand or new product will also be outlawed.

The Spiritualist Workers’ Association attacked the changes, saying “We do not believe we are conducting a scientific experiment. To have to stand up and say so is a denial of our beliefs.” Lyn Guest de Swarte, a clairvoyant, said: “It’s like trying to regulate God.” Um, yeah, right.

Bookmark with:

Digg

Farmers' Markets - sorting out the wheat from the chaff

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:41:17 GMT

I'm all for Farmers' Markets if they allow genuine, independent producers to cut out supermarkets and get a decent income. But the one near me is often discussed for its very high prices and increasingly un-local produce.

So I'm, beginning to wonder...was there a point where the concept was hijacked and abused? Farmers' Markets have tripled in number since 2001 according to the National Farmers' Retail and Markets Association, the industry body which defines 'local' as preferably within a 30-mile radius or 50 miles if in a city or remote area.

Now Trading Standards have found that shoppers regularly pay over the odds at Farmers' Markets and are confused about the source of the produce on offer, often spending more because they think - sometimes wrongly - they are helping local farms. Many Farmers' Markets are now clamping down on sellers to ensure they are truly local and that their produce is not over-priced. Some traders have even been selling food bought from the fruit and vegetable wholesale market at Covent Garden in London, or from suppliers hundreds of miles away.

Hhmm. If someone wants to get up super-early, buy produce and then set up a stall to sell it, then good luck to them. But - and here's the rub - isn't the whole point that people buying their goods in these markets deserve to know its source so they can make an informed choice? Some may want to buy it anyway, cutting out the supermarket, but others may be looking for a good deal from a local grower. Much as I hate red tape and nannying, I suspect we are in for some new rules (to, er, make sure no one is milking it).

Have your say... is your local Farmers' Market truly local? Would you like to see a few more rules or should Trading Standards be concentrating on supermarkets instead? Leave your comments below....

Photo: www.jaysfancydress.co.uk

Bookmark with:

Digg

Are your groceries shrinking but bills rising?

Fri, 27 Jun 2008 08:22:05 GMT

I'm still coming across people who are genuinely amazed to find that food prices are really soaring and that it is not all made up by the newspapers. The average household grocery bill went up nearly a fifth in May because of oil costs and the soaring price of wheat, corn and maize. Rice and coffee prices are running at 10-year highs, and in some countries, prices for milk and meat have more than doubled.

We're constantly being told how competitive our big supermarkets are but shoppers should stay alert for a new trend which is already misleading customers in the US and Australia. Many manufacturers are quietly reducing the volume of their products but keeping prices the same, or higher. So you get increasingly less bang for your buck. In many cases, the size of the packaging remained the same and so although the reduced contents volume was printed on it, only eagle-eyed shoppers would spot the change.

"There's a grocery shrink ray that has been unleashed on supermarkets across America," Ben Popken of American consumer website Consumerist.com which is monitoring this trend across the pond.

In the US so far, mayonaise, ice cream, breakfast cereal, orange juice, washing up liquid, cling film and rubbish bags have all seen unit volumes - but not prices - drop as manufacturers attempt to claw back costs. "Some of them do it at the same time as they change the package design," Popken explains. "They're hoping to distract you with a new feature, but fail to tell you that, oops, by the way, it happens to be smaller," he said.

Popken also urges us to keep an eye out for similar cuts in restaurants, who are making portions smaller and - heaven forbid - reducing beer sizes (watch out for heavy-bottomed glasses to disguise the smaller contents).

Here are 10 ways to save on your shopping bill.

Have you spotted any shrinkage on the supermarket shelves? Name and shame the culprits here by leaving a comment below.....

Photo: Mothercare.com

Bookmark with:

Digg

Which improvements add value to your home?

Tue, 24 Jun 2008 17:17:12 GMT

Right now, friends are talking a lot about whether to buy, sell or stay put at the moment. The ones who are going to stay put for a while are thinking of using the time to make some home improvements so that when they do sell, they can bump up the price a bit.

I think this mirrors what is happening across large parts of the country. Home insurer LV= has done some research which shows that almost one million homes are being renovated or revamped over the coming 12 months rather than sold because owners are worried about the effects of the credit crunch.

But home improvements can be a bit of a minefield as your idea of a 'must-have' is a potential buyer's 'so what'. Making 'improvements' which are completely out of proportion with your property will be pointless. But knowing what is in demand in your area and making the most of what you have can pay dividends. So what exactly are home improvements which add value to your home and which are a waste of money? I have trawled various sources to come up with a hit list...

Adding value: Creating off-road parking - but at the side, rather than the front of your home
Landscaping the garden
Painting and decorating
Bathrooms and kitchens - updating suites and fittings
Installing/updating central heating
Insulating your loft and cavity walls - energy efficient homes are become more sought after
Increasing natural light
Loft conversion
Conservatory
Updating the exterior of the property

No guarantees: Replacement windows - generally a plus for looks and energy efficiency but beware anything too fancy or not in keeping with the property.
Reinstating original chimneys and fireplaces - period features are great but may not add extra value.
Installing a swimming pool - if you are happy to shell out purely for your own pleasure then great but don't expect it to be a selling point.

Just don't: Botched DIY - anything that looks unprofessional, such as a badly fitting kitchen or uneven plastering will get buyers wondering and asking questions
Ripping out period features such as fireplaces
Textured plaster or woodchip
Creating windowless rooms
Adding plastic double-glazing or windows that don't open
Adding stone cladding.
Laying new carpets - unless yours are in a bad state
Laying cheap wooden flooring

Sources: RICs, B&Q, Knight Frank, National Association of Estate Agents

Photo: www.lazydayzpools.com

Bookmark with:

Digg

Who offers the best current account and credit card?

Sun, 22 Jun 2008 16:43:06 GMT

It does not surprise me in the slightest that the 'big five' banks have been snubbed by consumer campaigners Which? in the organisation's annual awards.

The Best Current Account gong was instead picked up by online bank Cahoot which offers a healthy 3.65% interest rate for customers in the black, compared to the miserly 0.01% typically offered by the big high street banks. Shortlisted for this award were Nationwide and Smile.

The John Lewis Partnership won Best Credit Card Provider for its Mastercard offering, which has long been a Which? ‘Best Buy’ thanks to its 0% balance transfer deals and attractive card reward scheme. A close relation of mine is a big fan of the latter and regularly enjoys the John Lewis gift vouchers sent as part of their rewards. Marks & Spencer Money and Nationwide were shortlisted for this award.

“Getting a good deal for consumers is what Which? exists for, so it’s a pleasure to celebrate the businesses and individuals that are delivering that ideal - today’s award winners truly represent the best of the best in UK products and services," says Which? chief executive, Peter Vicary-Smith.

A positive note on which to start the week.

Do you have a wonderful bank or card provider that you recommend to friends? Leave a comment below....

Bookmark with:

Digg