Messageboard
Notes and Queries permalink
Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Â
Posted by Hemcrit (U13457737) on Tuesday, 30th September 2008
What happened to Marjorie Antrobus' will?
We were away for the funeral and I can't find the answer. Could have been a great story line.Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 2
Posted by Reggie Trentham (U2746099) on Tuesday, 30th September 2008
I don't think anything was mentioned at the time of her death or funeral but when she went into the Laurels it was made quite clear that paying the fees there would take all her remaining assets. So presumably she had little or nothing to leave.
Anyway it would have been the dogs home not cats, she was 'the dog woman' after all.Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 3
Posted by smarttedebear (U3614285) on Tuesday, 30th September 2008
It would have been interesting if there had been a mention of Mrs A's finances. It could have made a good storyline about the unfair way some old people have to sell their houses to pay the nursing home fees. Unfortunately, two of the most pressing financial problems which affect the ordinary people in society, as opposed to the rich such as Peggy/Jack/Brian/Jennifer/ Matt/Lilian etc/, are not really mentioned much in TA. I refer, of course, to nursing home fees and local people in the countryside being unable to buy houses. I know the latter has been covered but usually the house fairy comes along and all is sorted.
I enjoy hearing about Peggy/Jack etc., but the other side of the coin would be good to hear sometimes.Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 4
Posted by Arkwright Hall (U8718267) on Wednesday, 1st October 2008
the unfair way some old people have to sell their houses to pay the nursing home fees Â
Excuse me, but why shouldn't people with wealth, whether in cash or in property, pay for the care that they need? Medical costs excluded, of course.
Whether the charges of such establishments are excessive is another issue, of course.
Seems to me it is clear greed by the next generation: they don't want old person to stay with them but they want the money, so the taxpayer must pick up the bill.
Sez hoo?Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 5
Posted by Spike (U2256483) on Wednesday, 1st October 2008
How long was she in the Laurels for?
To have whittled her entire capital down to nothing she'd have had to be there a very long time. Presumably she made a reasonable amount on her property, with other investments/pensions on top would make a sum not unadjacent to £250,000. My mother survived on the interest of less than half that for about 5 years in care, barely touching the capital sum.Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 6
Posted by taddydogman (U13374770) on Wednesday, 1st October 2008
I seem to remember that Marjorie (along with Caroline Bone as she then was) lost most of her savings to Cameron Fraser in about 1992. So I imagine she would have had very little in the way of assets and doubtless the proceeds from the sale of Nightingale Farm would have been swallowed up by the cost of residential care at The Laurels.
Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 7
Posted by barwick_green (U2668006) on Saturday, 4th October 2008
< Excuse me, but why shouldn't people with wealth, whether in cash or in property, pay for the care that they need? Medical costs excluded, of course.
Whether the charges of such establishments are excessive is another issue, of course.
Seems to me it is clear greed by the next generation: they don't want old person to stay with them but they want the money, so the taxpayer must pick up the bill. >
So if you you live in council/privately rented accomodation (generally cheaper and you have no maintenance biils to pay and your councul tax bills are likely to be lower than a those of a homeowner) all you adult life then you can go into a care home and the taxpayer picks up the bill?
This might be the same taxpayer who scrimps to pay the mortgage for 25+ years and has less money to spend on luxuries than his council house rent subsidised neighbour then has their only asset seized off them to pay for the same level of care that another resident can get for SFA?
What a strange world you live in sez me.Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 8
Posted by rosietonthemove (U2260932) on Saturday, 4th October 2008
message 7 What a strange world you live in if you really think all "council house rent subsidised" people have enough money to spend on luxuries.
Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 9
Posted by cath (U2234232) on Sunday, 5th October 2008
She sold the house for (iirc) £340,000. So there should still be a fair amount of moolah left even if she was paying at say £500pw.
As to the argument about home owners versus tenants, the people who choose to buy their home have made a /choice/ (something most tenants are never in the fortunate position of having). They end up with a valuable - generally - asset and that being so they should use that asset to pay for their own provision rather than expect taxpayers to subsidise their living expenses. And the second and third generations should get on with their own lives instead of waiting for taxpayer-subsidised largesse to fall upon their heads.Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 10
Posted by barwick_green (U2668006) on Sunday, 5th October 2008
What a strange world you live in
Quoted message from Barwick_Green
if you really think all "council house rent subsidised" people have enough money to spend on luxuries.
Back in the late ninteies/early noughties my job entailed visiting long term DHSS claimants; hardly a home was without widescreen TVs/surround sound DVDs and Sky Sports and pictures of family holidays to Spain and often Florida.
I'm not saying all council house tenants are minted but my point remains that home owners and/or anyone who has saved diigently are penalised by a system that pays the totalcare costs for the more feckless in the community.
Let me put it this way; if Joe Grundy went into a care home then the taxpayer would pick up the bill. If Phil Archer was in the room next door then he'd be paying for it; how can that be fair when Joe has been a lazy scrounging criminally inefficient farmer and Phil has worked damn hard with no more to his name to begin with than his counterpart?
Why bother working hard?Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 11
Posted by RosieT (U2224719) ** on Sunday, 5th October 2008
message 10 If Phil Archer was in the room next door then he'd be paying for it; Would he? He has only his state pension, and something like £18,000(shared with Jill) pension from Divid and Ruth, doesn't he?
Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 12
Posted by RosieT (U2224719) ** on Sunday, 5th October 2008
<-message 10 Phil has worked damn hard with no more to his name to begin with than his counterpart? Well, Phil had a farmhouse and inherited a farm from his father, and Joe was a rent-payer without inheriting anything, so not quite level, is it?
Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 13
Posted by smarttedebear (U3614285) on Sunday, 5th October 2008
<
This reminds me that when I worked on a large council estate in a large city in the 1980s and early nineties nearly every council house had the new-fangled cable television.Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 14
Posted by taddydogman (U13374770) on Monday, 6th October 2008
I can go back a lot further than that. When TV sets were finding their way into people's houses in the 1950s the first homes to have them in the town where I lived were all council-owned properties. Very few homeowners could afford TV at that time (my parents certainly couldn't).
Incidentally, I don't think Phil and Jill are that strapped for cash. Their monthly income may not be high but they have their own savings which explains how they have been able to afford two antipodean trips in recent times, one of which involved their travelling business class.Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 15
Posted by RosieT (U2224719) ** on Monday, 6th October 2008
<- message 14
But he didn't start out "with no more to his name" than Joe - he started out with considerably more.Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 16
Posted by Reggie Trentham (U7102122) on Monday, 6th October 2008
This reminds me that when I worked on a large council estate in a large city in the 1980s and early nineties nearly every council house had the new-fangled cable television.Â
Go on, tell us they kept their coal in the bath too.Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 17
Posted by barwick_green (U2668006) on Monday, 6th October 2008
Not in the shower room they didn't.
Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 18
Posted by barwick_green (U2668006) on Monday, 6th October 2008
< But he didn't start out "with no more to his name" than Joe - he started out with considerably more. >
Perhaps I'm wrong in that Phil actually bought Brookfield; I thought he'd taken over the tenancy from his dad and then purchased it himself.
Okay, how about Moike Tugger and Eddie Grundy in the years to come? Moike will have to pay for his care whilst indolent Eddie gets his gratis?Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 19
Posted by Reggie Trentham (U7102122) on Monday, 6th October 2008
Okay, how about Moike Tugger and Eddie Grundy in the years to come? Moike will have to pay for his care whilst indolent Eddie gets his gratis?Â
Well, Eddie isn't indolent is he? The contrast between the situations of Mike Tucker and Eddie Grundy are almost entirely down to circumstance and luck. Mike happens to own a house and Eddie is a tenant but not because one is more morally virtuous or hard working. That's the point really.
So why shouldn't Mike have to pay for his care from his assets? Even more pertinently why should Brenda and Roy inherit something which they certainly have done nothing to earn?Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 20
Posted by RosieT (U2224719) ** on Monday, 6th October 2008
message 18
Dan bought Brookfield Farm in 1954 when the Squire broke up the Estate.
Phil inherited it.Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 21
Posted by barwick_green (U2668006) on Monday, 6th October 2008
I'm stretching my point here but why didn't/couldn't Joe Grundy have done the same back in the day with Grange Farm (which I don' think they owned when they bankrupt)?
And Eddy/Joe are indolent; neither particularly like working hard and are always ready to work cash in hand, start late and finish early. Eddie's meat scam was at best irresponsible if not potentially fatal and it's a Grundy family trait to earn an easy dishonest buck whenever possible (Wimyum notwithstanding).
Joe's running of Grange Farm was criminally (he has the record to prove it) negligent. No amount of recent airbrushing of his past by SWs of late can change the fact he's basically a lazy, selfish and dishonest.
I still stand by my point that, generally speaking, those who invest in themselves and try to be as independant as possible are clobbered in old age when the more feckless get free care, pension credits etc etc.Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 22
Posted by RosieT (U2224719) ** on Monday, 6th October 2008
message 21
The original point to which I responded is:
<>
I merely pointed out that *Phil* inherited farm and wealth, but *Joe* did not so that was not
<< with no more to his name to begin with than his counterpart>>
Yes, Phil worked far, far harder than Joe, but they /did/ /not/ /start/ /out/ /from/ /the/ /same/ wealth/.Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 23
Posted by barwick_green (U2668006) on Tuesday, 7th October 2008
< Yes, Phil worked far, far harder than Joe, but they /did/ /not/ /start/ /out/ /from/ /the/ /same/ wealth/ >
My subsequent point was why did Joe not buy Grange Farm? I suppose it's a moot point as the Grundys were silents until the early 1970s (?) so we don't know their prior history before then. However Dan- maybe only a decade or so older than Joe - had no 'wealth' and would have had to scrape and scrimp to pay the mortgage whilst the Grundy family were probably carousing in the Cat & Fiddle.Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 24
Posted by Reggie Trentham (U2746099) on Tuesday, 7th October 2008
Barwick can I take you up on a couple of points? The fact that Eddie works for cash and may sometimes flirts with illegality says nothing about his capacity to work hard or otherwise. How many now respectable fortunes have been founded on dodgy practices? The fact that the Grundys didn't run their farm well does mean they didn't work hard.
We don't know whether Joe ever had a chance to buy the farm. Certainly the economic circumstances in the mid fifties when Dan brought Brookfield, with relatively low land prices, and those in which the Grundys lost Grange farm were radically different. As I said previously it's mostly a matter of luck not hard work and application.
But anyway the argument isn't really about the ability of the living to pay for care but the right to inherit, why else preserve your wealth? I'd have no problem with every body's care needs being met by the state providing there was a proper inheritance tax i.e. that people were only allowed to pass on personal property.Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 25
Posted by RosieT (U2224719) ** on Tuesday, 7th October 2008
reply to Reggie Trentham in message 24
And isn't Joe the contemporary of Phil, and Dan was the contemporary of Joe's father (George Grundy)? Phil didn't buy his farm, it was left to him. Joe didn't buy his farm, nor was it left to him.Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 26
Posted by dickie (U2267358) on Wednesday, 8th October 2008
I don't suppose that the answer to this question is known, but why would George Grundy not have been in the same position as Dan Archer, i.e. able to buy Grange Farm on the break up of the estate?
Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 27
Posted by taddydogman (U13374770) on Wednesday, 8th October 2008
I seem to recall that Dan Archer did in fact have a lot of difficulty in raising the money to buy Brookfield at the time. George Grundy would have had similar difficulty but in his case presumably the odds went against him.Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 28
Posted by rosietonthemove (U2260932) on Wednesday, 8th October 2008
in reply to taddydogman in message 27
Also, Dan's father died and Dan was pulled back from the front to run the farm, and given the tenancy of Brookfield some time later, but George Grundy had to carry on fighting in the trenches, and came back to a farm /his/ father was running for the Squire, and had to carry on after WW1 in a less favourable position than Dan.Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 29
Posted by Reggie Trentham (U2746099) on Wednesday, 8th October 2008
I expect it was by no means obvious that agriculture was going to go through a boom in 1954 rather than slip back into the depressed state it had been in the thirties. So turning down an opportunity to buy a tenancy was probably just as rational a decision as buying one.
Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 30
Posted by Dragonfly (U2223700) on Wednesday, 8th October 2008
The fact that Eddie works for cash and may sometimes flirts with illegality says nothing about his capacity to work hard or otherwise. How many now respectable fortunes have been founded on dodgy practices? The fact that the Grundys didn't run their farm well does mean they didn't work hard.Â
Working hard doesn't necessarily mean working effectively, though, does it? Doing well in a business has a lot do with luck and application, but it also has to do with intelligence and good planning.Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 31
Posted by barwick_green (U2668006) on Wednesday, 8th October 2008
< Barwick can I take you up on a couple of points? The fact that Eddie works for cash and may sometimes flirts with illegality says nothing about his capacity to work hard or otherwise. How many now respectable fortunes have been founded on dodgy practices? The fact that the Grundys didn't run their farm well does mean they didn't work hard. >
Reggie -indeed; there's a saying along the lines of 'Behind every big fortune there's a big crime. How many Dukes and Lords have lands and baubles as a result of some heinous but long forgotten incident? How many household name companies were initially funded by the proceeds of crime and dodgy dealings?
That said, my impression of Joe and Eddie has always been that they are/were both slapdash and and indolent unless someone (Clarrie or their employer) closely monitored them. Neither has much of a reputaion for their workmanship, timekeeping or reliability.
The Grundys have always blamed others for their misfortunes whilst others who have gone through bad times (Moike Tugger lost his farm and went bankrupt) have learnt from their mistakes and accepted their culpability.Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
-
Message 32
Posted by smarttedebear (U3614285) on Wednesday, 8th October 2008
I totally agree and find the character transformation of Joe, Eddie and Ed quite remarkable. I could believe in one of the Grundy clan realising the error of their ways but not all three. I am awaiting their elevation to sainthood. I feel sure this must be imminent.Link to this forum: Did granny leave all her money to a cats' home?
About this Board
Welcome to the Archers Messageboard.
or  to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
This messageboard is now closed.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú iD
Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú navigation
Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú links
Copyright © 2015 Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú. The Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.