Frugal Living: Feb 24, 2010

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

misc.consumers.frugal-living - 25 new messages in 10 topics - digest

misc.consumers.frugal-living
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en

misc.consumers.frugal-living@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Delivered unsafe item damaged me
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3012e11d0875cc7d?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 8 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 23 2010 9:02 pm
From: DerbyDad03

On Feb 23, 11:58 am, "michael adams" <mjadam...@onetel.net.uk> wrote:
> "DerbyDad03" <teamarr...@eznet.net> wrote in message
>
> news:626fc5ae-49be-43b9-9b3c-cbbf04e39566@n5g2000vbq.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 23, 7:22 am, "michael adams" <mjadam...@onetel.net.uk> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "Toom Tabard" <t...@tabard.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
>
> >news:6bda30bf-3abb-4c76-8dac-7adf26c628ce@g19g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > Total nonsense - in an item supplied to a consumer,
>
> > Regardless of who its supplied to, consumers don't ever get to
> > handle gas hobs because. they normally give the job to a fitter
> > or similar professional.
>
> > An experienced fitter wouldn't have cut his hand in this way.
> > But then an experienced fitter would have cost money.
>
> > The OP can't have it both ways. Either he's a consumer in which
> > case he gives the job to someone who can handle it, or he's a
> > fitter in which case he wouldn't have cut his hand.
>
> > Had this been a saucepan being talked about then that would
> > be an entirely different thing.
>
> > michael adams
>
> > ...
> > re: Either he's a consumer in which case he gives the job to someone
> > who can handle it, or he's a fitter in which case he wouldn't have cut
> > his hand."
> > What?
>
> ...
>
> In the UK at least a "fitter" is a name given to professional installers
> of all sorts of things. Kitchen fitter, motor fitter, electrical fitter
> etc etc.
>
> Not just simply to someone who "fits" things.
>
> A professional fitter might reasonably be expected to have the experience to
> forstall such problems.
>
> The packaging being complained of is intended for opening by professional
> tradesmen. Not unskilled amateurs.
>
> "Unskilled" if only in the sense that when they cut their little "handies" as
> a result of not using a box-cutter, the correct tool for the job, they then
> start to blub like little children. And start demanding that the "naughty man"
> should be made to pay money to Charity "cos they hurted demselves"
>
> Yeah right! Like that's gonna happen !
>
> HTH
>
> michael adams
>
> posting on uk.people.consumers
>
> ....
>
> > You don't truly believe that a "consumer" can't be a "fitter" do you?
> > I guess I shouldn't have put in my own windows or doors or bath
> > fixtures or water heater or stove or deck or any of the other things
> > I've "fitted" into my house.
> > After all, I'm just a consumer and "can't handle it".
> > I'm not defending the OP...I'm not even talking about the OP. I'm only
> > responding to your claim that a consumer can't also be the fitter.

re: "In the UK at least a "fitter" is a name given to professional
installers of all sorts of things."

I know what you meant by a "fitter".

However, I still don't agree with your point that a consumer should
never handle a gas hob.

Using US terminology, I'm not a "contractor" but I bought all of my
windows and doors from a "contractor's supply house".

They weren't packaged any differently than the windows and doors you'd
buy from a "consumer's supply house"

I'm not a plumber, but I bought my fixtures at a plumbing supply
house. They weren't packaged any differently than the fixtures at the
big box stores, where "consumer's" shop.

re: "The packaging being complained of is intended for opening by
professional tradesmen. Not unskilled amateurs."

Again, I beg to differ. Packaging isn't "intended" to be opened by
people of a certain occupation. It's intended to protect an item
during shipping/storage.

If the item in question should never have been (to use your word)
"handled" by the consumer, then it should have been a "controlled
substance" and he shouldn't have been able to buy it without a license
or proof of training. Absent those restrictions, anyone, consumer or
professional, is allowed to "handle" the product and it's their
responsibility to take the proper precautions when doing so.

== 2 of 8 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 3:18 am
From: Toom Tabard

On 23 Feb, 12:22, "michael adams" <mjadam...@onetel.net.uk> wrote:
> "Toom Tabard" <t...@tabard.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
>
> news:6bda30bf-3abb-4c76-8dac-7adf26c628ce@g19g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Total nonsense - in an item supplied to a consumer,
>
> Regardless of who its supplied to, consumers don't ever get to
> handle gas hobs because. they normally give the job to a fitter
> or similar professional.
>
> An experienced fitter wouldn't have cut his hand in this way.
> But then an experienced fitter would have cost money.
>
> The OP can't have it both ways. Either he's a consumer in which
> case he gives the job to someone who can handle it, or he's a
> fitter in which case he wouldn't have cut his hand.
>
> Had this been a saucepan being talked about then that would
> be an entirely different thing.
>

Nope. It would not be unusual for a consumer to unpack a gas hob,
install it and connect it if it is to a simple user connect point.
Only needs a fitter if gas fittings themselves need installed and
consumer doesn't have the necessary competence.

Toom

== 3 of 8 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 6:58 am
From: "michael adams"

"Toom Tabard" <toom@tabard.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:36dc3bb8-466c-4445-b9dd-c357e8527e50@g26g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
> On 23 Feb, 12:22, "michael adams" <mjadam...@onetel.net.uk> wrote:
> > "Toom Tabard" <t...@tabard.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
> >
> > news:6bda30bf-3abb-4c76-8dac-7adf26c628ce@g19g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > > Total nonsense - in an item supplied to a consumer,
> >
> > Regardless of who its supplied to, consumers don't ever get to
> > handle gas hobs because. they normally give the job to a fitter
> > or similar professional.
> >
> > An experienced fitter wouldn't have cut his hand in this way.
> > But then an experienced fitter would have cost money.
> >
> > The OP can't have it both ways. Either he's a consumer in which
> > case he gives the job to someone who can handle it, or he's a
> > fitter in which case he wouldn't have cut his hand.
> >
> > Had this been a saucepan being talked about then that would
> > be an entirely different thing.
> >
>
> Nope. It would not be unusual for a consumer to unpack a gas hob,
> install it and connect it if it is to a simple user connect point.
> Only needs a fitter if gas fittings themselves need installed and
> consumer doesn't have the necessary competence.
>
> Toom
>

By definition the OP didn't have the necessary competence in this situation
otherwise he wouldn't have cut his hand. Having the necessary competence
must embrace an element of knowing what to expect.

Nearly every stainless steel sink I've ever seen has had steel locating
tabs at right angles around the underside of the sink complete with screw
holes. The edges of these tabs are always sharp - they're straight out of
a press and could easily cut the hand of anyone foolish enough to reach
their hand inside the carton to lift out the sink by that means. But nobody
is ever reported as having done so because people familiar with sinks will
know what to expect.

As it happens IIRR the OP didn't mention whether there was a manual that
came with his hob. Had there been such a manual, quite possibly it would
have advised not only the wearing of gloves, but also goggles and a safety
helmet. And in a room with adequate ventilation just so as to cover all
the bases.

michael adams

...

== 4 of 8 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 10:40 am
From: "Rod Speed"

DerbyDad03 wrote:
> On Feb 23, 11:58 am, "michael adams" <mjadam...@onetel.net.uk> wrote:
>> "DerbyDad03" <teamarr...@eznet.net> wrote in message
>>
>> news:626fc5ae-49be-43b9-9b3c-cbbf04e39566@n5g2000vbq.googlegroups.com...
>> On Feb 23, 7:22 am, "michael adams" <mjadam...@onetel.net.uk> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> "Toom Tabard" <t...@tabard.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
>>
>>> news:6bda30bf-3abb-4c76-8dac-7adf26c628ce@g19g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>>> Total nonsense - in an item supplied to a consumer,
>>
>>> Regardless of who its supplied to, consumers don't ever get to
>>> handle gas hobs because. they normally give the job to a fitter
>>> or similar professional.
>>
>>> An experienced fitter wouldn't have cut his hand in this way.
>>> But then an experienced fitter would have cost money.
>>
>>> The OP can't have it both ways. Either he's a consumer in which
>>> case he gives the job to someone who can handle it, or he's a
>>> fitter in which case he wouldn't have cut his hand.
>>
>>> Had this been a saucepan being talked about then that would
>>> be an entirely different thing.
>>
>>> michael adams
>>
>>> ...
>>> re: Either he's a consumer in which case he gives the job to someone
>>> who can handle it, or he's a fitter in which case he wouldn't have
>>> cut his hand."
>>> What?
>>
>> ...
>>
>> In the UK at least a "fitter" is a name given to professional
>> installers
>> of all sorts of things. Kitchen fitter, motor fitter, electrical
>> fitter
>> etc etc.
>>
>> Not just simply to someone who "fits" things.
>>
>> A professional fitter might reasonably be expected to have the
>> experience to forstall such problems.
>>
>> The packaging being complained of is intended for opening by
>> professional tradesmen. Not unskilled amateurs.
>>
>> "Unskilled" if only in the sense that when they cut their little
>> "handies" as a result of not using a box-cutter, the correct tool
>> for the job, they then start to blub like little children. And start
>> demanding that the "naughty man" should be made to pay money to
>> Charity "cos they hurted demselves"
>>
>> Yeah right! Like that's gonna happen !
>>
>> HTH
>>
>> michael adams
>>
>> posting on uk.people.consumers
>>
>> ....
>>
>>> You don't truly believe that a "consumer" can't be a "fitter" do
>>> you? I guess I shouldn't have put in my own windows or doors or bath
>>> fixtures or water heater or stove or deck or any of the other things
>>> I've "fitted" into my house.
>>> After all, I'm just a consumer and "can't handle it".
>>> I'm not defending the OP...I'm not even talking about the OP. I'm
>>> only responding to your claim that a consumer can't also be the
>>> fitter.
>
> re: "In the UK at least a "fitter" is a name given to professional
> installers of all sorts of things."
>
> I know what you meant by a "fitter".
>
> However, I still don't agree with your point that a consumer should
> never handle a gas hob.
>
> Using US terminology, I'm not a "contractor" but I bought all of my
> windows and doors from a "contractor's supply house".
>
> They weren't packaged any differently than the windows and doors you'd
> buy from a "consumer's supply house"

Plenty of other stuff is tho, most obviously with yorkshire fittings for copper plumbing etc.

> I'm not a plumber, but I bought my fixtures at a plumbing
> supply house. They weren't packaged any differently than
> the fixtures at the big box stores, where "consumer's" shop.

Bet the yorkshire fittings were. Mine are loose in bins etc.

Same with taps etc too.

> re: "The packaging being complained of is intended for
> opening by professional tradesmen. Not unskilled amateurs."

> Again, I beg to differ. Packaging isn't "intended" to be opened by
> people of a certain occupation. It's intended to protect an item
> during shipping/storage.

> If the item in question should never have been (to use your word)
> "handled" by the consumer, then it should have been a "controlled
> substance" and he shouldn't have been able to buy it without a license
> or proof of training.

Thats wrong too, most obviously with yorkshire fittings.

They arent legal to use by ordinary consumers who arent legally
allowed to do their own plumbing but are sold freely anyway.

Same with GPOs etc too, they arent legally usable by the consumer either.

> Absent those restrictions, anyone, consumer or
> professional, is allowed to "handle" the product and it's their
> responsibility to take the proper precautions when doing so.

== 5 of 8 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 10:50 am
From: Ste

On 24 Feb, 18:40, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > re: "The packaging being complained of is intended for
> > opening by professional tradesmen. Not unskilled amateurs."
> > Again, I beg to differ. Packaging isn't "intended" to be opened by
> > people of a certain occupation. It's intended to protect an item
> > during shipping/storage.
> > If the item in question should never have been (to use your word)
> > "handled" by the consumer, then it should have been a "controlled
> > substance" and he shouldn't have been able to buy it without a license
> > or proof of training.
>
> Thats wrong too, most obviously with yorkshire fittings.
>
> They arent legal to use by ordinary consumers who arent legally
> allowed to do their own plumbing but are sold freely anyway.

Are you joking sarcastically, or are you just talking completely out
of your arse?

== 6 of 8 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 11:01 am
From: "joe parkin"

Ste wrote:

> On 24 Feb, 18:40, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > re: "The packaging being complained of is intended for
> > > opening by professional tradesmen. Not unskilled amateurs."
> > > Again, I beg to differ. Packaging isn't "intended" to be opened by
> > > people of a certain occupation. It's intended to protect an item
> > > during shipping/storage.
> > > If the item in question should never have been (to use your word)
> > > "handled" by the consumer, then it should have been a "controlled
> > > substance" and he shouldn't have been able to buy it without a
> > > license or proof of training.
> >
> > Thats wrong too, most obviously with yorkshire fittings.
> >
> > They arent legal to use by ordinary consumers who arent legally
> > allowed to do their own plumbing but are sold freely anyway.
>
> Are you joking sarcastically, or are you just talking completely out
> of your arse?

It is not illegal to sell unsuitable fittings and appliances but to
install one would be illegal, so check suitability before purchase. The
regulations detail standards for suitability and the Water Fittings and
Materials Directory, published by the WRAS, gives up-to-date details of
a wide range of items which have been tested and proved to comply, when
installed correctly, and can be accessed from their website.

== 7 of 8 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 11:21 am
From: Skippy

On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 10:50:18 -0800 (PST), Ste <ste_rose0@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On 24 Feb, 18:40, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > re: "The packaging being complained of is intended for
>> > opening by professional tradesmen. Not unskilled amateurs."
>> > Again, I beg to differ. Packaging isn't "intended" to be opened by
>> > people of a certain occupation. It's intended to protect an item
>> > during shipping/storage.
>> > If the item in question should never have been (to use your word)
>> > "handled" by the consumer, then it should have been a "controlled
>> > substance" and he shouldn't have been able to buy it without a license
>> > or proof of training.
>>
>> Thats wrong too, most obviously with yorkshire fittings.
>>
>> They arent legal to use by ordinary consumers who arent legally
>> allowed to do their own plumbing but are sold freely anyway.
>
>Are you joking sarcastically, or are you just talking completely out
>of your arse?

The fuckwit lives in australia where they are considered too stupid to
do their own plumbing or electrics

== 8 of 8 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 2:20 pm
From: "Rod Speed"

Ste wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote

>>> re: "The packaging being complained of is intended for
>>> opening by professional tradesmen. Not unskilled amateurs."
>>> Again, I beg to differ. Packaging isn't "intended" to be opened by
>>> people of a certain occupation. It's intended to protect an item
>>> during shipping/storage.

>>> If the item in question should never have been (to use your word)
>>> "handled" by the consumer, then it should have been a "controlled
>>> substance" and he shouldn't have been able to buy it without a
>>> license or proof of training.

>> Thats wrong too, most obviously with yorkshire fittings.

>> They arent legal to use by ordinary consumers who arent legally
>> allowed to do their own plumbing but are sold freely anyway.

> Are you joking sarcastically,

Nope.

> or are you just talking completely out of your arse?

Nope, talking about the situation in some jurisdictions.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: █๑♥๑█ 2010 Cheap Wholesale ED Hardy Sweater, Lacoste Sweater, GUCCI
Sweater ect at www.rijing-trade.com <Paypal Payment>
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/d7faeb28630350df?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 1:05 am
From: "www.fjrjtrade.com"

█๑♥๑█ 2010 Cheap Wholesale ED Hardy Sweater, Lacoste Sweater, GUCCI
Sweater ect at www.rijing-trade.com <Paypal Payment>

Welcome to website

www.rijing-trade.com

High quality Cheap Wholesale Sweaters

High quality Cheap Wholesale ED Hardy Sweaters

High quality Cheap Wholesale Lacoste Sweaters

High quality Cheap Wholesale Lacoste Sweaters Man

High quality Cheap Wholesale Lacoste Sweaters Women

High quality Cheap Wholesale GUCCI Sweaters

High quality Cheap Wholesale GUCCI Sweaters Man

High quality Cheap Wholesale GUCCI Sweaters Women

High quality Cheap Wholesale Ralph Lauren Sweaters

http://www.rijing-trade.com

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Free shipping Hot sale Air Force one sneakers paypal payment (http://
www.vipchinatrade.com)
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/118fc066c7b3409a?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 1:10 am
From: Abby

Air Force one sneakers paypal payment
Cheap Wholesale Air Force One Man paypal payment
Cheap Wholesale Air Force One Women paypal payment
Cheap Wholesale Air Force One M&W paypal payment
Cheap Wholesale Air Force one 25 Man paypal payment
Cheap Wholesale Air Force One 25 Women paypal payment
Cheap Wholesale Air Force One Kid paypal payment
Cheap Wholesale Air Force one Mid Man paypal payment
Cheap Wholesale Air Force one Mid Women paypal payment
Cheap Wholesale Air Force one Hight Women paypal payment
website: http://www.vipchinatrade.com

==============================================================================
TOPIC: "selma blair" "salma hayek" "salma hayek hot" "salma hayek wallpapers"
"hollywood sexiest scenes" "hollywood blue films" "hollywood movies free
download" on http://sexyandpretty-girls.blogspot.com/
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/a418e9ba734911e2?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 4:02 am
From: Naeem

"selma blair" "salma hayek" "salma hayek hot" "salma hayek wallpapers"
"hollywood sexiest scenes" "hollywood blue films" "hollywood movies
free download" on http://sexyandpretty-girls.blogspot.com/
"selma blair" "salma hayek" "salma hayek hot" "salma hayek wallpapers"
"hollywood sexiest scenes" "hollywood blue films" "hollywood movies
free download" on http://sexyandpretty-girls.blogspot.com/
"selma blair" "salma hayek" "salma hayek hot" "salma hayek wallpapers"
"hollywood sexiest scenes" "hollywood blue films" "hollywood movies
free download" on http://sexyandpretty-girls.blogspot.com/
"selma blair" "salma hayek" "salma hayek hot" "salma hayek wallpapers"
"hollywood sexiest scenes" "hollywood blue films" "hollywood movies
free download" on http://sexyandpretty-girls.blogspot.com/
"selma blair" "salma hayek" "salma hayek hot" "salma hayek wallpapers"
"hollywood sexiest scenes" "hollywood blue films" "hollywood movies
free download" on http://sexyandpretty-girls.blogspot.com/
"selma blair" "salma hayek" "salma hayek hot" "salma hayek wallpapers"
"hollywood sexiest scenes" "hollywood blue films" "hollywood movies
free download" on http://sexyandpretty-girls.blogspot.com/
"selma blair" "salma hayek" "salma hayek hot" "salma hayek wallpapers"
"hollywood sexiest scenes" "hollywood blue films" "hollywood movies
free download" on http://sexyandpretty-girls.blogspot.com/
"selma blair" "salma hayek" "salma hayek hot" "salma hayek wallpapers"
"hollywood sexiest scenes" "hollywood blue films" "hollywood movies
free download" on http://sexyandpretty-girls.blogspot.com/
"selma blair" "salma hayek" "salma hayek hot" "salma hayek wallpapers"
"hollywood sexiest scenes" "hollywood blue films" "hollywood movies
free download" on http://sexyandpretty-girls.blogspot.com/
"selma blair" "salma hayek" "salma hayek hot" "salma hayek wallpapers"
"hollywood sexiest scenes" "hollywood blue films" "hollywood movies
free download" on http://sexyandpretty-girls.blogspot.com/
"selma blair" "salma hayek" "salma hayek hot" "salma hayek wallpapers"
"hollywood sexiest scenes" "hollywood blue films" "hollywood movies
free download" on http://sexyandpretty-girls.blogspot.com/
"selma blair" "salma hayek" "salma hayek hot" "salma hayek wallpapers"
"hollywood sexiest scenes" "hollywood blue films" "hollywood movies
free download" on http://sexyandpretty-girls.blogspot.com/
"selma blair" "salma hayek" "salma hayek hot" "salma hayek wallpapers"
"hollywood sexiest scenes" "hollywood blue films" "hollywood movies
free download" on http://sexyandpretty-girls.blogspot.com/
"selma blair" "salma hayek" "salma hayek hot" "salma hayek wallpapers"
"hollywood sexiest scenes" "hollywood blue films" "hollywood movies
free download" on http://sexyandpretty-girls.blogspot.com/
"selma blair" "salma hayek" "salma hayek hot" "salma hayek wallpapers"
"hollywood sexiest scenes" "hollywood blue films" "hollywood movies
free download" on http://sexyandpretty-girls.blogspot.com/
"selma blair" "salma hayek" "salma hayek hot" "salma hayek wallpapers"
"hollywood sexiest scenes" "hollywood blue films" "hollywood movies
free download" on http://sexyandpretty-girls.blogspot.com/
"selma blair" "salma hayek" "salma hayek hot" "salma hayek wallpapers"
"hollywood sexiest scenes" "hollywood blue films" "hollywood movies
free download" on http://sexyandpretty-girls.blogspot.com/
"selma blair" "salma hayek" "salma hayek hot" "salma hayek wallpapers"
"hollywood sexiest scenes" "hollywood blue films" "hollywood movies
free download" on http://sexyandpretty-girls.blogspot.com/
"selma blair" "salma hayek" "salma hayek hot" "salma hayek wallpapers"
"hollywood sexiest scenes" "hollywood blue films" "hollywood movies
free download" on http://sexyandpretty-girls.blogspot.com/

==============================================================================
TOPIC: صعيدي اشتري بي ام
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/2e959a476d25314c?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 4:45 am
From: GooglesY

سامحونا ياحماصنة
http://www.googlesy.com/vb/showthread.php?t=21607

صعيدي اشتري بي ام

http://www.googlesy.com/vb/showthread.php?t=21632

وازرة الاقتصاد تخفض سعر اسطوانة الغاز الفارغة
http://www.googlesy.com/vb/showthread.php?t=21646
سر النوم على الجانب الايمن
http://www.googlesy.com/vb/showthread.php?t=21633

بذور شجرة إفريقية تجعل المياه الملوثة صالحة للشرب
http://www.googlesy.com/vb/showthread.php?t=21551

كيت وينسلت تضع الاوسكار في المرحاض
http://www.googlesy.com/vb/showthread.php?t=21647

منى زكي تستعد للظهور مع اوبرا
http://www.googlesy.com/vb/showthread.php?t=21628

ميريام فارس ومفاجأة من العيار الثقيل

http://www.googlesy.com/vb/showthread.php?t=21547

العثور على رضيعة في حمامات مسجد
http://www.googlesy.com/vb/showthread.php?t=21583

روبوت يرسم الاشخاص
http://www.googlesy.com/vb/showthread.php?t=21580

==============================================================================
TOPIC: walking boots-- which are good?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/52b4735386145e8e?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 7 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 7:39 am
From: "Bill Grey"

"Michael Black" <et472@ncf.ca> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.64.1002231246480.6880@darkstar.example.net...
> On Tue, 23 Feb 2010, SMS wrote:
>
>> Christopher Loffredo wrote:
>>
>>> Though many, including myself, dislike Gore-Tex in a boot.
>>
>> That's the first time I've _ever_ heard of _anyone_ disliking GoreTex in
>> a boot.
>>
>>> It requires a different construction method, which leads to the boot not
>>> lasting as long, can create a sweatier environment, starts leaking
>>> fairly quickly and then does a good job of keeping the water *in*.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, Gore-Tex-less boots are getting harder and harder to
>>> find...
>>
>> For good reason. The GoreTex membrane allows the boot to breathe while
>> remaining waterproof. The membrane is safely sandwiched inside,
>> protecting it, so it doesn't get clogged with dirt or oil.
>>
>> The GoreTex lasts the life of the boot. My last pair of boots with a
>> GoreTex liner lasted for 25 years without leaking or failing to breathe.
>>
> Gore-Tex isn't magic. It's a very thin layer that almost looks like
> plastic. If it isn't protected properly, it will no longer work. I had a
> Gore-Tex jacket that wore out about 8 years after I bought it, the
> non-Gore-Tex wore out which then left the Goretex layer vulnerable. Since
> it has no strength in itself, there went the waterproof
>
> So either the boot has to be made really well to protect that Gore-Tex, or
> you won't get any long life out of it. A pair of boots that lasts 25 years
> is either seeing very little use, or were very expensive in the first
> place. They stood up because of the rest of the boot, not the Gore-Tex.
>
> I have doubts about its value in boots. On a jacket or pants, it makes
> sense, since you are merely warding off rain, and the rest of the jacket
> is well designed to be resistant to rain in the first place.
>
> Boots, they get immersed in snow or water. How well does the rest of the
> boot hold up? Gore-Tex isn't just about that thin layer, if it's not put
> in properly (what about that stiching over there?) it won't mean a thing.
>
> If the boot soaks up water, you really aren't at an advantage over
> no-Gore-Tex. I have my doubts about it keeping the water out when
> immersed in water, but then other factors come into play. If you're
> walking through snow or water, chances are good you'll hit spots where
> the rain or water is higher than the boot, and your feet get wet that way
> anyway.
>
> The conditions where I'd worry about getting my feet wet, I'd want
> something different in the way of a shoe or boot. Something with rubber
> around the lower level, which then gets connected to leather upper
> (though, I've not had a lot of success with those, the first time I bought
> a pair of winter boots like that, they held for about seven years before
> the rubber broke, but more recent purchases have had the rubber breaking
> before a year is up). Otherwise, you live with the occasional wet foot,
> I don't find my feet get wet due to rain, they get wet due to puddles.
>
> When I walked to New York City in 1982, someone had "rubbers" or
> "galoshes", thin rubber overshoes that went over shoes, he actually wore
> them over light hiking shoes. I have no idea how comfortable it was, but
> seemed a reasonable method for those times when it was quite wet.
>
> I wouldn't pay extra money for Gore-Tex in shoes, I don't see the point.
>
> Michael

If you're not keen on Gore-Tex why not say so :-)

I am on my second pair of Meindle Scout t5rail shoes which are Goretex
lined. I wear them every day when walking my dog. OK i don't wear them over
rough ground but the ground is frerquently sodden. I got my second pair
because the first started to look a bit shabby, not worn out. I can
honestly say I've never had wet feet even when the oputers are vewry wet. I
once had some water enter the shoe by runninf off my waterproof trousers and
then down into the top of the shoe.

I write this in case you've put some folk off Gore-Tex.

Bill

== 2 of 7 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 8:50 am
From: SMS

Bill Grey wrote:

> I am on my second pair of Meindle Scout t5rail shoes which are Goretex
> lined. I wear them every day when walking my dog. OK i don't wear them over
> rough ground but the ground is frerquently sodden. I got my second pair
> because the first started to look a bit shabby, not worn out. I can
> honestly say I've never had wet feet even when the oputers are vewry wet. I
> once had some water enter the shoe by runninf off my waterproof trousers and
> then down into the top of the shoe.
>
> I write this in case you've put some folk off Gore-Tex.

Unlikely!

Remember, the early GoreTex back in the 1980's was not nearly as good as
today's product. Back then it was known as "the miracle membrane that
lets moisture in and traps it."

Today, it would be exceedingly foolish to purchase hiking boots or trail
shoes for wet conditions that were not GoreTex. Actaully if they were
full grain leather you could get away with the lack of GoreTex by
applying Sno-Seal or some other wax, but that affects breath ability.
For non-full-grain leather you can't apply those waxes, so GoreTex is
even more important.

Bottom line is that all the experts agree that you should _never_
purchase a pair of hiking boots, walking shoes, etc., that do not have a
GoreTex (or competing product) membrane, if you expect to have them ever
get wet.

== 3 of 7 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 9:33 am
From: Phil Cook

SMS wrote:

>Today, it would be exceedingly foolish to purchase hiking boots or trail
>shoes for wet conditions that were not GoreTex. Actaully if they were
>full grain leather you could get away with the lack of GoreTex by
>applying Sno-Seal or some other wax, but that affects breath ability.
>For non-full-grain leather you can't apply those waxes, so GoreTex is
>even more important.
>
>Bottom line is that all the experts agree that you should _never_
>purchase a pair of hiking boots, walking shoes, etc., that do not have a
>GoreTex (or competing product) membrane, if you expect to have them ever
>get wet.

I remain unconvinced that GoreTex is the wonder material you purport
it to be. My last pair of four season winter walking boots were sans
Tex and my current pair have it. I never noticed my feet getting wet
(from the outside) in the old pair despite a good many years in rather
"mixte" conditions. Bogs and slush can be wet in the extreme and both
tend to feature prominently in Scottish winter hillwalking. The reason
I bought my latest pair with Tex are that they fitted me better than
any alternative, the comfort was the killer application for me rather
than the liner.

What everybody agrees upon, experts and laymen alike, is that boots or
shoes that start uncomfortable will never become comfortable. Fit, fit
and fit are the important things, all else is supplementary.
--
Phil Cook, last hill: Am Bodach in the Mamores on a sunny day :-)
pictures at http://www.therewaslight.co.uk soonish...

== 4 of 7 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 10:58 am
From: "Rod Speed"

Phil Cook wrote:
> SMS wrote:
>
>> Today, it would be exceedingly foolish to purchase hiking boots or
>> trail shoes for wet conditions that were not GoreTex. Actaully if
>> they were full grain leather you could get away with the lack of
>> GoreTex by applying Sno-Seal or some other wax, but that affects
>> breath ability. For non-full-grain leather you can't apply those
>> waxes, so GoreTex is even more important.
>>
>> Bottom line is that all the experts agree that you should _never_
>> purchase a pair of hiking boots, walking shoes, etc., that do not
>> have a GoreTex (or competing product) membrane, if you expect to
>> have them ever get wet.
>
> I remain unconvinced that GoreTex is the wonder material you purport
> it to be. My last pair of four season winter walking boots were sans
> Tex and my current pair have it. I never noticed my feet getting wet
> (from the outside) in the old pair despite a good many years in rather
> "mixte" conditions. Bogs and slush can be wet in the extreme and both
> tend to feature prominently in Scottish winter hillwalking. The reason
> I bought my latest pair with Tex are that they fitted me better than
> any alternative, the comfort was the killer application for me rather
> than the liner.

> What everybody agrees upon, experts and laymen alike, is that boots
> or shoes that start uncomfortable will never become comfortable.

That is just plain wrong. One pair I got was a bit tight across
the top of the foot with one foot, and the wore in fine.

The reason I persisted with them was because I got that pair
for free as a warranty claim when the soles split and I got the
exchange by mail in and I didnt get to try them on.

> Fit, fit and fit are the important things, all else is supplementary.

Yes, but your claim that that never become comfortable is just plain wrong.
That pair is now the most comfortable I have ever owned.

== 5 of 7 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 11:05 am
From: SMS

Phil Cook wrote:

> What everybody agrees upon, experts and laymen alike, is that boots or
> shoes that start uncomfortable will never become comfortable. Fit, fit
> and fit are the important things, all else is supplementary.

If the boots are full-grain leather then there can be a break-in period
where they become more comfortable. But for cheaper boots of nubuck,
suede, or fabric, they probably won't become more comfortable than they
are at the time of purchase.

== 6 of 7 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 11:22 am
From: SMS

john bently wrote:
> Now i have retired I would like to start walking. Would anyone know of a
> good place to see some *critical* reviews of the different walking boots
> available please? Apparently the last consumers association review was done
> way back in april 2006.
>
> Or would anyone know of some boots (preferably not too expensive) that are
> generally believed by many people to be a good buy? Thanks for any advice.

When you say "walking" do you mean on trails where ankle support is
critical so you need actual boots, or on pavement and paths where you
can get by with lower walking shoes?

For hiking boots look for:

-One-piece, full grain leather uppers
-Goretex membrane for breathability and water-proofing
-Vibram soles for traction (nothing beats Vibram soles for traction)

For walking shoes it's a little easier:

-Leather or nubuck
-Goretex membrane for breathability and water-proofing
-Vibram or other sole with good traction

Look for boots/shoes which come in a lot of sizes, including different
widths and half sizes. In the U.S., it's often annoying that half-sizes
stop at 11 (on the cheaper shoes) though this is changing a little
because they're bringing in more of the European sized products where
there are more whole sizes that correspond to U.S. half sizes.

In the U.S., for actual boots, some of the brands and models to look for
are:

Danner® Mountain Light II
Vasque Summit GTX
Asolo Power Matic 200 GV
Cabela's All-Leather Mountain Hikers

== 7 of 7 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 11:57 am
From: Michael Black

On Thu, 25 Feb 2010, Rod Speed wrote:

>> What everybody agrees upon, experts and laymen alike, is that boots
>> or shoes that start uncomfortable will never become comfortable.
>
> That is just plain wrong. One pair I got was a bit tight across
> the top of the foot with one foot, and the wore in fine.
>
> The reason I persisted with them was because I got that pair
> for free as a warranty claim when the soles split and I got the
> exchange by mail in and I didnt get to try them on.
>
But that's a different case.

A shoe or boot, you don't have the option of taking back once you've
actually used them. So the best you can do is take them home, wear them
inside to get a feel for them, and then take them back if they don't fit.
Once you wear them outside, they are actually used and I doubt many
companies will take them back.

If you have nothing to lose, you might as well persist. But if you
have doubts, then the time to deal with it is before you irreversibly
wear them outside. They may improve with time, but if they don't,
you are stuck with boots that you can't take back.

Michael

==============================================================================
TOPIC: how much did I pay for our house? (for tax purposes)
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/ce1376c8da9beb50?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 7:52 am
From: Ohioguy

CHARDON, OH —

A guy in Ohio has built himself a place where he can really chill out: a
625-square-foot house made of snow and equipped with cable television
and a flat screen TV.

Jim Grey started his cold construction project at the beginning of
January when a storm left a load of snow in his family's yard in the
Cleveland suburb of Chardon. He kept building and building, and now has
a snow structure that spans four rooms with 6-foot ceilings, including
the entertainment room with the TV, a surround-sound system and strobe
lights.

Grey's friend, A.J. Fay, says it was "cool" watching a little pile of
snow grow into a full-size igloo.

Grey says his work isn't done. He's now adding a guest bedroom in case
of visitors.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 10:51 am
From: James

On Feb 24, 10:52 am, Ohioguy <n...@none.net> wrote:
> <and then there are people who build a 625 square foot house for free..>
>
> CHARDON, OH —
>
> A guy in Ohio has built himself a place where he can really chill out: a
> 625-square-foot house made of snow and equipped with cable television
> and a flat screen TV.
>
> Jim Grey started his cold construction project at the beginning of
> January when a storm left a load of snow in his family's yard in the
> Cleveland suburb of Chardon. He kept building and building, and now has
> a snow structure that spans four rooms with 6-foot ceilings, including
> the entertainment room with the TV, a surround-sound system and strobe
> lights.
>
> Grey's friend, A.J. Fay, says it was "cool" watching a little pile of
> snow grow into a full-size igloo.
>
> Grey says his work isn't done. He's now adding a guest bedroom in case
> of visitors.

Thats nothing...check out the ice hotel in Quebec
http://www.icehotel-canada.com/

==============================================================================
TOPIC: My ex=ISP tried to pull an AOL
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/e83594d5ebc746a4?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 8:16 am
From: Al

VFW wrote:
> Sonic.net out of Santa Rosa, CA tried to charge me for a service I
> cancelled.
> So, now I spend what they say I owe on telling others about their
> "service"
> Revenge full.
> --
> Money; What a Concept !

One time I had an ISP that started delaying email so they could filter
it for viruses. I complained and started receiving virus mail. Then
when I was posting here and mentioned it, I received an email on my
private account from some lesbian with threats. I dumped that ISP and
became much more careful. that goes back years. I just checked and
the ISP is out of business.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 8:43 am
From: SMS

VFW wrote:
> Sonic.net out of Santa Rosa, CA tried to charge me for a service I
> cancelled.
> So, now I spend what they say I owe on telling others about their
> "service"
> Revenge full.

There's got to be more to the story than this. Sonic.net is probably the
best ISP in the entire country, bar none. Their support is outstanding,
and locally based, not in India.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Siding vs. painting the house
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/f101ad7af8a7691a?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 10:41 am
From: Cindy Hamilton

On Feb 23, 7:26 pm, "h" <tmcl...@searchmachine.com> wrote:

> Agreed. I just re-sided my nearly 200 year old house with cedar. I'd burn it
> down before I put vinyl on it. Shudder.

On the other hand, vinyl on the postwar bungalow that was my first
house
would not have made anybody shudder. It was a completely unremarkable
crackerbox, and no exterior improvement would have markedly affected
the value.

My current house is a postwar ranch, veneered three sides with
granite
(and the other side with brick). Built by a stonemason. I wish he'd
popped for granite on the back--that's the side I see the most of.
Still,
I can add on to the back without weeping over hacking up the veneer.

Cindy Hamilton

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Do you too see the connection b/ wasting energy and terrorism?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/510b0bf3b79b779e?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 1:50 pm
From: TheTibetanMonkey

On Feb 24, 1:16 pm, Jack <furgfurgf...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Feb 24, 3:48 pm, TheTibetanMonkey > > > > Are you a terrorist?

> > > > ARE YOU A TERRORIST?

> > I neither play with bombs nor do I drive an SUV, so the answer in "NO!"-
>
>
> whatever that means-

It means they are both terrorists. SUVs terrorize me on my bicycle,
thus I remain in my cage. Besides wasting energy feeds INJUSTICE and
TERRORISM, right?

WELCOME TO THE JUNGLE
http://webspawner.com/users/BANANAREVOLUTION

==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "misc.consumers.frugal-living"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to misc.consumers.frugal-living+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en

misc.consumers.frugal-living - 15 new messages in 5 topics - digest

misc.consumers.frugal-living
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en

misc.consumers.frugal-living@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

* Soup bouillion cubes - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/b57b09cbb01b6494?hl=en
* Siding vs. painting the house - 4 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/f101ad7af8a7691a?hl=en
* walking boots-- which are good? - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/52b4735386145e8e?hl=en
* how much did I pay for our house? (for tax purposes) - 7 messages, 5 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/ce1376c8da9beb50?hl=en
* Delivered unsafe item damaged me - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3012e11d0875cc7d?hl=en

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Soup bouillion cubes
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/b57b09cbb01b6494?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 23 2010 1:17 pm
From: aesthete8

On Feb 21, 6:05 pm, John...@BadISP.org wrote:
> SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> >aesthete8wrote:
> >> Any recommendations?
>
> >Try "Better than Bouillon."
>
> >"http://www.superiortouch.com/retail/products/better-than-bouillon"
>
> >We get their organic product at Costco in 16 ounce jars. I don't
> >remember the price, I think it's around $10 though.
>
> Only if you like sweet soup. Of course if you're making a soup or dish
> that's supposed to be sweet go right ahead. Americans generally ruin a
> whole lot of products with their penchant for sweetness (boosts the
> food industry profits).
>
> Examples: bread, ham, soups, and worst of all, Heinz Baked Beans.
> Actually any baked beans. Try the UK, Canadian, or Australian
> versions, most often by the same manufacturer.
>
> Of course Americans are so used to the inappropriate use of sweeteners
> they actually like these adulterated products. I remember one episode
> of America's Test Kitchen where the dish called for bread. The head
> honcho made a big effort to get non-sweet bread but his assistants
> (women of a certain age) actually said they preferred Wonder bread. I
> suppose it depends on what you had as a child.

Interesting observation about sweetness.

For a couple of years, I didn't eat ice cream because it was really
expensive where I lived.

Then when I moved, ice cream was cheaper so I began eating it.

At first, I was surprised by how sweet it was.

But I must have gotten used to it after awhile because I began putting
more sugar into my coffee.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 23 2010 3:32 pm
From: SMS

JohnDoe@BadISP.org wrote:
> SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>> aesthete8 wrote:
>>> Any recommendations?
>> Try "Better than Bouillon."
>>
>> "http://www.superiortouch.com/retail/products/better-than-bouillon"
>>
>> We get their organic product at Costco in 16 ounce jars. I don't
>> remember the price, I think it's around $10 though.
>
> Only if you like sweet soup. Of course if you're making a soup or dish
> that's supposed to be sweet go right ahead. Americans generally ruin a
> whole lot of products with their penchant for sweetness (boosts the
> food industry profits).

It's got a little cane sugar in it (no HFCS) but it is still salty. Far
less sodium than bouillon cubes.

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 23 2010 1:19 pm
From: aesthete8

On Feb 21, 1:44 pm, aesthete8 <art...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Over the long term, isn't siding a better investment?
>
> Won't it eliminate the need to paint the house forever?

Thanks to all for your quick and informative replies.

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 23 2010 1:39 pm
From: "Bob F"

Kalmia wrote:
> On Feb 21, 6:44 pm, aesthete8 <art...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Over the long term, isn't siding a better investment?
>>
>> Won't it eliminate the need to paint the house forever?
>
> How long do you plan to live in that house? When was it last
> painted? I need more facts before making a decision. What prices are
> you talking about?
>
> That asked, I have never met anyone who was sorry he sided instead of
> painted.

The people that cared about the look of the house didn't do it. I suspect my
cedar siding will be good for another 80 years.

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 23 2010 4:26 pm
From: "h"

"Bob F" <bobnospam@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:hm1hu8$8rg$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> Kalmia wrote:
>> On Feb 21, 6:44 pm, aesthete8 <art...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Over the long term, isn't siding a better investment?
>>>
>>> Won't it eliminate the need to paint the house forever?
>>
>> How long do you plan to live in that house? When was it last
>> painted? I need more facts before making a decision. What prices are
>> you talking about?
>>
>> That asked, I have never met anyone who was sorry he sided instead of
>> painted.
>
> The people that cared about the look of the house didn't do it. I suspect
> my cedar siding will be good for another 80 years.
>
Agreed. I just re-sided my nearly 200 year old house with cedar. I'd burn it
down before I put vinyl on it. Shudder.

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 23 2010 8:31 pm
From: Les Cargill

Malcom "Mal" Reynolds wrote:
> In article
> <hlv7b9$ngj$1@news.eternal-september.org
>> ,
> "Bob F" <bobnospam@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>>>>> Hell, even cultured stone or stone veneer would be better,
>>>>>>> cheaper, etc than bricks.
>>>>>> Pity about what it does to the value of the house, fuckwit child.
>>>>> Ah, I see. Because someone adds
>>>>> something that is cheaper, easier to
>>>>> install and much easier to maintain and
>>>>> repair, that somehow in your mind lowers
>>>>> (I assume you are implying a lowered
>>>>> value) the value of the house.
>>>>>
>>>>> So in the name of letting you hang
>>>>> yourself even further old fella, why not
>>>>> post some anecdotal evidence that this
>>>>> is true.
>>>> Speed never contributes anything of use. Just block him like just
>>>> about everyone else here does.
>>> Why? he dances so well
>> Not really.
>
> Okay, maybe I should have added "for
> someone so mentally challenged"

http://flimmr.passagen.se/movie/family_guy_stubborn_as_a_mule.action

--
Les Cargill

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 23 2010 2:49 pm
From: SMS

Michael Black wrote:

> Gore-Tex isn't magic. It's a very thin layer that almost looks like
> plastic. If it isn't protected properly, it will no longer work. I had
> a Gore-Tex jacket that wore out about 8 years after I bought it, the
> non-Gore-Tex wore out which then left the Goretex layer vulnerable.
> Since it has no strength in itself, there went the waterproof

That's why GoreTex works especially well in boots. It _is_ protected
properly. For jackets, the early ones had the GoreTex membrane unprotected.

> So either the boot has to be made really well to protect that Gore-Tex,
> or you won't get any long life out of it. A pair of boots that lasts 25
> years is either seeing very little use, or were very expensive in the
> first place.

Probably 50 multi-day backpacking trips, and 1200 day hikes. They would
have lasted even longer but someone left them outside in the rain for a
long time and they were growing mold. Probably could have salvaged them,
but it was time for new soles which are not cheap. I hope I can get even
half the life of the replacement Vasque boots.

> I wouldn't pay extra money for Gore-Tex in shoes, I don't see the point.

I'd never buy a pair of hiking boots or hiking shoes that lacked
Gore-Tex for waterproofing. It's usually not even an option to not get
it since nearly every high-end pair of waterproof hiking boots has it.
I.e. all 72 types of waterproof hiking boots, from $100 to $475, sold at
REI are GoreTex. It doesn't add a lot of manufacturing cost, and it's a
huge advantage.

If you go to a lower end sporting goods store (in my area it's Big 5 or
Sports Authority) you can buy non-Goretex boots, but not full-grain
leather IIRC. Wal-Mart sells some full grain leather boots that are
non-Goretex for $30.

== 1 of 7 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 23 2010 3:17 pm
From: SMS

Ohioguy wrote:
> We just bought a HUD owned home at auction. There are many different
> numbers on the papers I look at in the paperwork, but I'm not sure which
> to use for tax purposes.
>
> For example, the total "bid" we made was $60k, but the papers show
> that of that HUD paid $2k themselves in "closing costs", and another
> roughly $4k went to the real estate agent as a commission. So that
> means that the seller of the home got only about $54k from us.
>
> Even if you include the commission to the realtor, we really only paid
> $58k, since HUD paid $2k.
>
> Not sure if I have to include the commission paid to the realtor
> and/or the $2k in closing costs that HUD paid itself. Would like to put
> a number down less than the full $60k, but not sure if I can. The FHA
> guy at closing said that we could use $54k for tax purposes, since that
> is what we actually paid HUD for the property, but I'm wondering if the
> local city tax folks would really allow that. Our closing papers show
> $60k as what we offered, and make no mention of the $2k HUD paid in
> closing. The $4k commission is only mentioned on other papers.

The money out of your pocket is what they'll use, though of course they
can assess it higher or lower based on comparable properties (but in
California it's rare for them to do this unless someone paid an
abnormally low price because they bought it from a friend or relative).

It's not really fair that your taxes are based on this higher amount,
but its the way it is. That's one reason that when you buy a house, if
you can afford it, you should pay the closing costs for the loan
separately and not have the seller include them in the price. They are
deductible from your income tax immediately (rather than over time if
bundled into the loan) and they don't show up as part of the purchase
price. Alas, many people can't afford to pay the closing costs
themselves so they have them included in the sale price, or roll them
into their own loan.

No matter what you paid, you can appeal the assessment if you really
think it'll go down.

What do you get for $60K in Ohio?

== 2 of 7 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 23 2010 3:27 pm
From: Gene S. Berkowitz

In article <w3Wgn.18655$OJ6.16471@newsfe22.iad>, none@none.net
says...
> We just bought a HUD owned home at auction. There are many different
> numbers on the papers I look at in the paperwork, but I'm not sure which
> to use for tax purposes.
>
> For example, the total "bid" we made was $60k, but the papers show
> that of that HUD paid $2k themselves in "closing costs", and another
> roughly $4k went to the real estate agent as a commission. So that
> means that the seller of the home got only about $54k from us.
>
> Even if you include the commission to the realtor, we really only
> paid $58k, since HUD paid $2k.
>
> Not sure if I have to include the commission paid to the realtor
> and/or the $2k in closing costs that HUD paid itself. Would like to put
> a number down less than the full $60k, but not sure if I can. The FHA
> guy at closing said that we could use $54k for tax purposes, since that
> is what we actually paid HUD for the property, but I'm wondering if the
> local city tax folks would really allow that. Our closing papers show
> $60k as what we offered, and make no mention of the $2k HUD paid in
> closing. The $4k commission is only mentioned on other papers.
>
> Thanks!

You paid $60K for the house.
HUD paid $2K to close the mortgage, NOT to buy the house.
The Seller (HUD) paid the Realtor the $4K commission out of their
earnings (your $60K).

No matter how you slice it, *you* paid $60K, and that's what you
should declare.

--Gene

== 3 of 7 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 23 2010 3:52 pm
From: SMS

Gene S. Berkowitz wrote:

> No matter how you slice it, *you* paid $60K, and that's what you
> should declare.

I don't think that there is anything to declare here. None of the
purchase price is deductible, it's the property taxes he's talking
about. The county or city will determine the property taxes based on the
purchase price that was recorded.

== 4 of 7 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 23 2010 4:27 pm
From: "The Henchman"

"Ohioguy" <none@none.net> wrote in message
news:w3Wgn.18655$OJ6.16471@newsfe22.iad...
> We just bought a HUD owned home at auction. There are many different
> numbers on the papers I look at in the paperwork, but I'm not sure which
> to use for tax purposes.
>
> For example, the total "bid" we made was $60k, but the papers show that
> of that HUD paid $2k themselves in "closing costs", and another roughly
> $4k went to the real estate agent as a commission. So that means that the
> seller of the home got only about $54k from us.
>
> Even if you include the commission to the realtor, we really only paid
> $58k, since HUD paid $2k.
>
> Not sure if I have to include the commission paid to the realtor and/or
> the $2k in closing costs that HUD paid itself. Would like to put a number
> down less than the full $60k, but not sure if I can. The FHA guy at
> closing said that we could use $54k for tax purposes, since that is what
> we actually paid HUD for the property, but I'm wondering if the local city
> tax folks would really allow that. Our closing papers show $60k as what
> we offered, and make no mention of the $2k HUD paid in closing. The $4k
> commission is only mentioned on other papers.
>
> Thanks!

I assummed you are talking about claiming this purchase on your income tax
return to qualify for tax refunds or credits, related to this house
purchase. Is this a correct assumption?

The closing papers show offered?? The closing papers should say purchase
price. The closing papers come from your lawyer do they not? Offer papers
come from your real estate agent, if you used one in your case.

Out of curiosity is Ohioguy allowed to claim any expenses such as title/lien
insurance, home inspection, real estate lawyer fees, township tax adjustment
etc that he paid out of pocket to complete the purchase on his federal
income tax filing?

== 5 of 7 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 23 2010 4:48 pm
From: MAS

On 2/23/2010 6:17 PM, SMS wrote:
> What do you get for $60K in Ohio?

I have a 1300 sq ft ranch on 1 acre, with a 2-car garage, in the
suburbs, assessed fairly IMO at $94,000. While our weather isn't
anything to crow about, the cost of living is decent in my area
(northwest Ohio)

Marsha

== 6 of 7 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 23 2010 6:37 pm
From: Ohioguy

>What do you get for $60K in Ohio?

A 2,100 square foot quad level with basement, 3 bedrooms, 2.5 baths,
attached garage. Plus, back yard is 5x our present size, fenced, &
school district is one of the best in the area. (we're moving from a D-
rated to A rated) Doesn't hurt that Caterpillar announced a new
facility with 600 jobs 1 mile away just 3 weeks after we signed for the
place.

== 7 of 7 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 23 2010 7:53 pm
From: SMS

Ohioguy wrote:
> >What do you get for $60K in Ohio?
>
> A 2,100 square foot quad level with basement, 3 bedrooms, 2.5 baths,
> attached garage. Plus, back yard is 5x our present size, fenced, &
> school district is one of the best in the area. (we're moving from a D-
> rated to A rated) Doesn't hurt that Caterpillar announced a new
> facility with 600 jobs 1 mile away just 3 weeks after we signed for the
> place.

OMG. That's about $1.2M in my town (also with good schools), but
slightly lower square feet and no basement on < 7000 square foot lot.

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 23 2010 9:02 pm
From: DerbyDad03