More about my loft conversion / survey report (see above threads).....

In investigating my suspicions that the loft conversion isn't supported well
enough and not having these details picked up by a full building survey, I
have just quizzed some neighbours about the previous owners.

It appears that THEY did the conversion themselves, maybe some 13 or 14
years ago. However we have a letter from their solicitor stating that the
loft conversion was there when they moved in in 1991 and the owners previous
to them had done no works in the previous 4 years.

So it appears that they lied to us. If we had known that they had done the
conversion so recently we would of course had asked for building regs
approval - their denial made us believe the structure was older and
long-standing.

I wonder what course of action to take now. It may be difficult to prove
that they did the works as the owners previous to them have since passed
away, so I guess our neighbours statements are our only chance.

Or do I just leave it - there does not appear to be any subsidence or
sagging to the loft, plus I know the previous owners are pretty poor and I
wonder how much compensation we could get anyway. Do we use their
solicitors statement to show the age of the conversion to our benefit when
we sell up?

Any other similar experiences?

Regards

Earl

Now that you know that the work is unsatisfactory you are going to have to
disclose the fact if you sell. Therefore you need to get it sorted for that
reason quite apart from the safety aspect. The problem in seeking redresss
from the previous owners is dependant on adeqaute proof. If it came to a
court case then you would have to prove that the previous owners lied to to
you. It would be worth having a quick word with your solicitor to see if he
confirms my feelings.

Peter Crosland

In article ,
"Earl Kella" writes:

I wonder what course of action to take now. It may be difficult to prove
that they did the works as the owners previous to them have since passed
away, so I guess our neighbours statements are our only chance.

Could be worth a browse through all the papers stuffed in with
the deeds. You might, for example, find the estate agent's sheet
describing the property back then, or something else which might
be useful.

In my house, at some stage someone removed the bottom of a
chimney, and made that area into a doorway into a bathroom.
In browsing back through the deeds, I can tell this was
done before 1974, because there's an application for a home
improvement grant in 1974 which outlines that area just as
it is today. (Interestingly, the home improvement grant was
paid, but not all the work described on it was done.)

I think you should be able to get your deeds back from the
building society now, as they are no longer of any value to
determine ownership or charge on a property if it's registered
at the land registry. Some building societies are sending
them all back to the owners anyway now (Nationwide for one,
ISTR).

--
Andrew Gabriel

I know the previous owners are pretty poor and I
wonder how much compensation we could get anyway. Do we use their
solicitors statement to show the age of the conversion to our benefit
when
we sell up?

They've defrauded you. They misrepresented it and it's worth less than
you paid them for it. That doesn't justify your misrepresenting it when
you come to sell up. Assuming it's still standing.


so I guess our neighbours statements are our only chance.
And any other neighbours who've been there that long, or any previous
neighbours you can trace, and the 2nd last owners, if you can trace
them. Look in the old register of electors in the central library for
names. Ask a solicitor if it's worth the effort.

Or do I just leave it - there does not appear to be any subsidence or
sagging to the loft, plus

You need a surveyor to survey it. It may be unsafe. What else might
they misled you about?

"Earl Kella" wrote in message
...
More about my loft conversion / survey report (see above threads).....

In investigating my suspicions that the loft conversion isn't supported
well
enough and not having these details picked up by a full building survey, I
have just quizzed some neighbours about the previous owners.

It appears that THEY did the conversion themselves, maybe some 13 or 14
years ago. However we have a letter from their solicitor stating that the
loft conversion was there when they moved in in 1991 and the owners
previous
to them had done no works in the previous 4 years.

I have just visited the Velux website to find that they have a serial number
for all of their windows. I've sent them an email with this windows details
so hopefully this should ascertain when the window was fitted - and hence
the loft conversion date.

In response to Aidens comment about me misrepresenting when I sell - I have
a bad feeling the previous sellers have no money to compensate me so I could
end up with no financial recompense. I am sure that most people would
therefore keep quiet about this and hope a new buyer accepts the
documentation I have showing the structure to be around 20 years old.

I think that does justify me misrepresenting when I sell - either I take a
hit now for someone elses bad workmanship or someone else does. All
hypothetical anyway until I get complete details about any extra works
needed. I think the £350 I've been quoted for a structural engineer to
inspect is worth it.

I have had a surveyor previously inspect the building when we bought and
nothing was mentioned - I now however don't even trust his judgement as I've
had the house in bits over the last 2 years.

Will keep you posted,

Regards

Earl

BTW, how many other DIY-ers out there have not told buyers about works they
have carried out - many I am sure as it's part of the game........

Earl Kella wrote:
"Earl Kella" wrote in message
...

More about my loft conversion / survey report (see above threads).....

In investigating my suspicions that the loft conversion isn't supported

well

enough and not having these details picked up by a full building survey, I
have just quizzed some neighbours about the previous owners.

It appears that THEY did the conversion themselves, maybe some 13 or 14
years ago. However we have a letter from their solicitor stating that the
loft conversion was there when they moved in in 1991 and the owners

previous

to them had done no works in the previous 4 years.


I have just visited the Velux website to find that they have a serial number
for all of their windows. I've sent them an email with this windows details
so hopefully this should ascertain when the window was fitted - and hence
the loft conversion date.

In response to Aidens comment about me misrepresenting when I sell - I have
a bad feeling the previous sellers have no money to compensate me so I could
end up with no financial recompense. I am sure that most people would
therefore keep quiet about this and hope a new buyer accepts the
documentation I have showing the structure to be around 20 years old.

What did they do with the money that you paid for the property?

There could be a considerable loss to you of their lies.
Didn't one woman have to cough up £80k after she sold a property stating
there hadn't been any trouble with neighbours, when in fact the
neighbours were from hell and made the property practically unsaleable?

On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 21:19:22 +0100, "Earl Kella"
wrote:


"Earl Kella" wrote in message
...
More about my loft conversion / survey report (see above threads).....

In investigating my suspicions that the loft conversion isn't supported
well
enough and not having these details picked up by a full building survey, I
have just quizzed some neighbours about the previous owners.

snip

'scuse me 'cos I'm diving in mid-thread, but you had a survey done
before you moved in that didn't highlight any problems?

Therefore if there is a structural problem, get an independant
engineers report and sue the surveyor for damages?

Surely it doesn't matter who carried out the loft conversion in this
case but the fact that it was 'mis-surveyed'?

sponix

I have a bad feeling the previous sellers have no money to compensate me so I could
end up with no financial recompense.

Thay have your money, you paid more than it was worth.

I am sure that most people would therefore keep quiet about this

Most people would.
But are you going to do what 'most people would do', or are you going
to make an weigh your conscience and make an individual decision? I'm
interested.

Baa.

I think that does justify me misrepresenting when I sell -

No. It would make you as dishonest as most people are.

Besides which, your neighbours know that you know.

"Aidan" wrote in message
ups.com...
I have a bad feeling the previous sellers have no money to compensate me
so I could
end up with no financial recompense.

Thay have your money, you paid more than it was worth.

I am sure that most people would therefore keep quiet about this

Most people would.
But are you going to do what 'most people would do', or are you going
to make an weigh your conscience and make an individual decision? I'm
interested.

Baa.

I think that does justify me misrepresenting when I sell -

No. It would make you as dishonest as most people are.

Besides which, your neighbours know that you know.


Don't really know what moral point you are making - this really boils down
to a business decision - just in the same way Rover didn't tell it's clients
and suppliers it was in trouble until it was too late and now they lose
thousands.

Are you saying I should take this on the nose and not try to pass the buck
to the next buyer of this house? What sort of business decision is that?
Would you really do the same?

Earl

Earl Kella wrote:

Don't really know what moral point you are making - this really boils down
to a business decision - just in the same way Rover didn't tell it's clients
and suppliers it was in trouble until it was too late and now they lose
thousands.

Are you saying I should take this on the nose and not try to pass the buck
to the next buyer of this house? What sort of business decision is that?
Would you really do the same?

Earl

Your posts are in the public domain, on google no less, along with
headers, detailed descriptions of the problem, history, and stated and
explained intention to commit a crime. Your neighbours also know about
it now, and may or may not talk to the next inhabitant.

You must be dumb as well as dishonest.


NT

wrote:
Earl Kella wrote:

Don't really know what moral point you are making - this really boils down
to a business decision - just in the same way Rover didn't tell it's clients
and suppliers it was in trouble until it was too late and now they lose
thousands.

Are you saying I should take this on the nose and not try to pass the buck
to the next buyer of this house? What sort of business decision is that?
Would you really do the same?

Earl

Your posts are in the public domain, on google no less, along with
headers, detailed descriptions of the problem, history, and stated and
explained intention to commit a crime. Your neighbours also know about
it now, and may or may not talk to the next inhabitant.

You must be dumb as well as dishonest.

Assuming he hasn't given a false name.

Earl Kella wrote:

Don't really know what moral point you are making - this really boils down
to a business decision - just in the same way Rover didn't tell it's clients
and suppliers it was in trouble until it was too late and now they lose
thousands.

Are you saying I should take this on the nose and not try to pass the buck
to the next buyer of this house? What sort of business decision is that?
Would you really do the same?

If I understand what you are saying -

What they appear to have done was wrong.
And you seem to think it was wrong of them to do it.
Yet you seem to think it's okay to do the same thing to someone else.

Hmmm......

Earl Kella wrote:
"Earl Kella" wrote in message
...
More about my loft conversion / survey report (see above threads).....

In investigating my suspicions that the loft conversion isn't supported
well
enough and not having these details picked up by a full building survey=
, I
have just quizzed some neighbours about the previous owners.

It appears that THEY did the conversion themselves, maybe some 13 or 14
years ago. However we have a letter from their solicitor stating that =
the
loft conversion was there when they moved in in 1991 and the owners
previous
to them had done no works in the previous 4 years.

I have just visited the Velux website to find that they have a serial num=
ber
for all of their windows. I've sent them an email with this windows deta=
ils
so hopefully this should ascertain when the window was fitted - and hence
the loft conversion date.

In response to Aidens comment about me misrepresenting when I sell - I ha=
ve
a bad feeling the previous sellers have no money to compensate me so I co=
uld
end up with no financial recompense. I am sure that most people would
therefore keep quiet about this and hope a new buyer accepts the
documentation I have showing the structure to be around 20 years old.

I think that does justify me misrepresenting when I sell - either I take a
hit now for someone elses bad workmanship or someone else does. All
hypothetical anyway until I get complete details about any extra works
needed. I think the =A3350 I've been quoted for a structural engineer to
inspect is worth it.

I have had a surveyor previously inspect the building when we bought and
nothing was mentioned - I now however don't even trust his judgement as I=
've
had the house in bits over the last 2 years.

Will keep you posted,

Regards

Earl

BTW, how many other DIY-ers out there have not told buyers about works th=
ey
have carried out - many I am sure as it's part of the game........

If I buy a used anything, it's up to me to check what I'm buying (and
the correctness of any bonus documentation). I don't see why that
should be different with a house. I'd say the onus is on the anus who
did your survey to give you back his fee. Otherwise I can only say that
I am amazed at how quickly this has become a nation of whiners feeding
beurocrats. Go try live in a shanty town or tent and get hardened up.
If you're really that worried about something that hasn't fallen down
in 13 years you'd be much better off fixing what worries you and
forgetting it quickly rather than spending months of aggravation giving
your money to leechy penpushers. It's for that reason that I am buying
a place abroad where nobody gives a **** and "part P" means you haven't
finished weeing.

Don't really know what moral point you are making - this really boils down
to a business decision

No. It is a moral decision.

What sort of business decision is that?

It is not a business decision; but it would be a decision to be
dishonest.

Would you really do the same?
Yes. I don't lie. Have done, would do. It's cost me a job.

Curiously, the manager who had objected to my decision was, IMHO,
thoroughly evil; his account of his previous business decisions led me
to suspect that they had probably caused some people a slow and painful
death. Such is the sound business decision way to promotion and pay.

In article ,
Peter Crosland wrote:
Now that you know that the work is unsatisfactory you are going to have
to disclose the fact if you sell. Therefore you need to get it sorted
for that reason quite apart from the safety aspect. The problem in
seeking redresss from the previous owners is dependant on adeqaute
proof. If it came to a court case then you would have to prove that the
previous owners lied to to you. It would be worth having a quick word
with your solicitor to see if he confirms my feelings.

Surely if the property was surveyed, the claim is against the surveyor?
Not much point in having one done otherwise?

--
*Many hamsters only blink one eye at a time *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 09:27:31 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Peter Crosland wrote:
Now that you know that the work is unsatisfactory you are going to have
to disclose the fact if you sell. Therefore you need to get it sorted
for that reason quite apart from the safety aspect. The problem in
seeking redresss from the previous owners is dependant on adeqaute
proof. If it came to a court case then you would have to prove that the
previous owners lied to to you. It would be worth having a quick word
with your solicitor to see if he confirms my feelings.

Surely if the property was surveyed, the claim is against the surveyor?
Not much point in having one done otherwise?


Basic building society evaluation "survey"?

Get-out clauses?



--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

The information contained in this post is copyright the
poster, and specifically may not be published in, or used by
http://www.diybanter.com

In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
Surely if the property was surveyed, the claim is against the surveyor?
Not much point in having one done otherwise?


Basic building society evaluation "survey"?

Even the most basic survey should have thrown up warning signs about this
sort of conversion?

Get-out clauses?

Yes - the BS one is for them, even although you pay for it, so in theory
you have no comeback.

--
*Despite the cost of living, have you noticed how it remains so popular?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

I think that does justify me misrepresenting when I sell

Difficult too see that. If you now misrepresent it you will be committing a
criminal offence quite apart from any moral issues.

Peter Crosland

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
wrote:


Your posts are in the public domain, on google no less, along with
headers, detailed descriptions of the problem, history, and stated and
explained intention to commit a crime. Your neighbours also know about
it now, and may or may not talk to the next inhabitant.

You must be dumb as well as dishonest.


NT

As a matter of interest, just how easy/difficult is it to establish the true
identity of a poster. For example, where would I find the detailed headers
for *this* message? Are they likely to show any or all of:
* my News.Individual.net account ID
* the IP address from which I posted it
* my ISP
* my logon account name
* etc.?
--
Cheers,
Set Square
______
Please reply to newsgroup. Reply address is invalid.

wrote in message
oups.com...
Earl Kella wrote:

Don't really know what moral point you are making - this really boils
down
to a business decision - just in the same way Rover didn't tell it's
clients
and suppliers it was in trouble until it was too late and now they lose
thousands.

Are you saying I should take this on the nose and not try to pass the
buck
to the next buyer of this house? What sort of business decision is
that?
Would you really do the same?

Earl

Your posts are in the public domain, on google no less, along with
headers, detailed descriptions of the problem, history, and stated and
explained intention to commit a crime. Your neighbours also know about
it now, and may or may not talk to the next inhabitant.

You must be dumb as well as dishonest.


NT


And you must be a hypocrite in the extreme......in the thread above about
building regs you recommend someone who removed a supporting wall without
building regs approval to not comment about it.

I am not dishonest, I am merely trying to ascertain from other members of
this group the best way to go with this. As yet I have no proof when the
conversion was made (neighbour has already said he couldn't swear to it), or
indeed anything that formally suggests it isn't supported correctly. If I
were to sell now I could easily do so truthfully and with paperwork and full
buildings survey to back it up - I merely have a hunch that I am
deliberating about following through in case it back fires on me.

Earl

wrote in message
ps.com...


Earl Kella wrote:
"Earl Kella" wrote in message
...
More about my loft conversion / survey report (see above threads).....

In investigating my suspicions that the loft conversion isn't supported
well
enough and not having these details picked up by a full building survey,
I
have just quizzed some neighbours about the previous owners.

It appears that THEY did the conversion themselves, maybe some 13 or 14
years ago. However we have a letter from their solicitor stating that
the
loft conversion was there when they moved in in 1991 and the owners
previous
to them had done no works in the previous 4 years.

I have just visited the Velux website to find that they have a serial
number
for all of their windows. I've sent them an email with this windows
details
so hopefully this should ascertain when the window was fitted - and hence
the loft conversion date.

In response to Aidens comment about me misrepresenting when I sell - I
have
a bad feeling the previous sellers have no money to compensate me so I
could
end up with no financial recompense. I am sure that most people would
therefore keep quiet about this and hope a new buyer accepts the
documentation I have showing the structure to be around 20 years old.

I think that does justify me misrepresenting when I sell - either I take a
hit now for someone elses bad workmanship or someone else does. All
hypothetical anyway until I get complete details about any extra works
needed. I think the £350 I've been quoted for a structural engineer to
inspect is worth it.

I have had a surveyor previously inspect the building when we bought and
nothing was mentioned - I now however don't even trust his judgement as
I've
had the house in bits over the last 2 years.

Will keep you posted,

Regards

Earl

BTW, how many other DIY-ers out there have not told buyers about works
they
have carried out - many I am sure as it's part of the game........

If I buy a used anything, it's up to me to check what I'm buying (and
the correctness of any bonus documentation). I don't see why that
should be different with a house. I'd say the onus is on the anus who
did your survey to give you back his fee. Otherwise I can only say that
I am amazed at how quickly this has become a nation of whiners feeding
beurocrats. Go try live in a shanty town or tent and get hardened up.
If you're really that worried about something that hasn't fallen down
in 13 years you'd be much better off fixing what worries you and
forgetting it quickly rather than spending months of aggravation giving
your money to leechy penpushers. It's for that reason that I am buying
a place abroad where nobody gives a **** and "part P" means you haven't
finished weeing.


That is indeed what I am also considering - if all I need do is put an RSJ
in for support then I shall do it, however I also feel a need to get the
lying *******s back who did the work in the first place - if I can get the
proof I shall do this. If I have no proof then I also can't truthfully say
anything about the conversion to a prospective buyer.

Earl

"Set Square" wrote in message
...
In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
wrote:


Your posts are in the public domain, on google no less, along with
headers, detailed descriptions of the problem, history, and stated and
explained intention to commit a crime. Your neighbours also know about
it now, and may or may not talk to the next inhabitant.

You must be dumb as well as dishonest.


NT

As a matter of interest, just how easy/difficult is it to establish the
true
identity of a poster. For example, where would I find the detailed headers
for *this* message? Are they likely to show any or all of:
* my News.Individual.net account ID
* the IP address from which I posted it
* my ISP
* my logon account name
* etc.?
--
Cheers,
Set Square
______

In the instance for example IF I were to do nothing and sell on to a new
buyer I think it is unlikely that anyone could match these posts with my
real identity. If they new my newsgroup id they may possibly match this
with rough location, but nothing definate. They would then have to get a
solicitor I imagine to approach tiscali for my real name and account
details.

If I buy a used anything, it's up to me to check what I'm buying (and
the correctness of any bonus documentation). I don't see why that
should be different with a house.

That is why it is wise to pay for a full structural survey. If it does not
reveal the nasties you have an insurance that will pay for the problem to
be rectified.

I'd say the onus is on the anus who
did your survey to give you back his fee.

If you had the right kind of survey. If you did not then you have no one to
blame but yourself.
That is indeed what I am also considering - if all I need do is put an RSJ
in for support then I shall do it, however I also feel a need to get the
lying *******s back who did the work in the first place - if I can get the
proof I shall do this. If I have no proof then I also can't truthfully
say
anything about the conversion to a prospective buyer.

Far from it. The fact that the RSJ has been put in by you is proof that you
did know there was a problem.

Peter Crosland

"Earl Kella" wrote in message
...

I am not dishonest, I am merely trying to
ascertain from other members of
this group the best way to go with this.

If the conversion was poorly supported, where can it be supported? Is it
easy enough to do. It may be less hassle and expense to just give extra
support and be done.

Earl Kella wrote:
wrote in message

And you must be a hypocrite in the extreme......in the thread above about
building regs you recommend someone who removed a supporting wall without
building regs approval to not comment about it.

a difficult situation, but probably the best option, unless you can
recommend a better one? Obviously I did not suggest using false
paperwork!

I am not dishonest,

Earl Kella wrote:

In the instance for example IF I were to do nothing and sell on to a new
buyer I think it is unlikely that anyone could match these posts with my
real identity. If they new my newsgroup id they may possibly match this
with rough location, but nothing definate. They would then have to get a
solicitor I imagine to approach tiscali for my real name and account
details.

anyone can track you to your ISP and within a limited area. To get name
or house number would require ISP's cooperation, but they can be very
cooperative.

As you say, although not difficult, its unlikely.


NT

wrote in message
oups.com...
Earl Kella wrote:

In the instance for example IF I were to do nothing and sell on to a new
buyer I think it is unlikely that anyone could match these posts with my
real identity. If they new my newsgroup id they may possibly match this
with rough location, but nothing definate. They would then have to get
a
solicitor I imagine to approach tiscali for my real name and account
details.

anyone can track you to your ISP and within a limited area. To get name
or house number would require ISP's cooperation, but they can be very
cooperative.

As you say, although not difficult, its unlikely.

Then use DIYbanter.

In article ,
Doctor Evil wrote:
If the conversion was poorly supported, where can it be supported? Is it
easy enough to do. It may be less hassle and expense to just give extra
support and be done.

Yup. A couple of Acrows could be considered a 'feature'.

--
*Out of my mind. Back in five minutes.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

wrote in message
oups.com...
Earl Kella wrote:
wrote in message

And you must be a hypocrite in the extreme......in the thread above
about
building regs you recommend someone who removed a supporting wall
without
building regs approval to not comment about it.

a difficult situation, but probably the best option, unless you can
recommend a better one? Obviously I did not suggest using false
paperwork!


And neither did I. The paperwork is genuine, whether the facts in it are
true is yet to be seen.

"Doctor Evil" wrote in message
...

"Earl Kella" wrote in message
...

I am not dishonest, I am merely trying to
ascertain from other members of
this group the best way to go with this.

If the conversion was poorly supported, where can it be supported? Is it
easy enough to do. It may be less hassle and expense to just give extra
support and be done.


I agree, however I'd like to know one thing: By putting in an RSJ this
would presumably have to comply with building regs - how would this affect
the rest of the conversion? Would I have to upgrade everything to comply -
eg fire doors etc or would the RSJ been seen as an independant modification?

Earl

In article ,
Earl Kella wrote:
If the conversion was poorly supported, where can it be supported? Is
it easy enough to do. It may be less hassle and expense to just give
extra support and be done.


I agree, however I'd like to know one thing: By putting in an RSJ this
would presumably have to comply with building regs - how would this
affect the rest of the conversion? Would I have to upgrade everything
to comply - eg fire doors etc or would the RSJ been seen as an
independant modification?

I hate saying this on a DIY group, but get an expert in. A structural
engineer would be the best bet, and unless something is very iffy I doubt
he'd report you to the council.

--
*There's no place like www.home.com *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Doctor Evil wrote:
If the conversion was poorly supported, where can it be supported? Is it
easy enough to do. It may be less hassle and expense to just give extra
support and be done.

Yup. A couple of Acrows could be considered a 'feature'.

How about electric cabers holding the place up?

In article ,
Doctor Evil wrote:
If the conversion was poorly supported, where can it be supported?
Is it easy enough to do. It may be less hassle and expense to just
give extra support and be done.

Yup. A couple of Acrows could be considered a 'feature'.

How about electric cabers holding the place up?

Good repost. Now explain it.

--
*When blondes have more fun, do they know it?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 23:16:35 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Doctor Evil wrote:
If the conversion was poorly supported, where can it be supported?
Is it easy enough to do. It may be less hassle and expense to just
give extra support and be done.

Yup. A couple of Acrows could be considered a 'feature'.

How about electric cabers holding the place up?

Good repost. Now explain it.


It seems pretty obvious to me, Dave. He's obsessed with anything that
involves tossing.....



--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

The information contained in this post is copyright the
poster, and specifically may not be published in, or used by
http://www.diybanter.com

Doctor Evil wrote:

As you say, although not difficult, its unlikely.


Then use DIYbanter.

Which makes it much quicker and easier since it stamps all messages with
the originating IP address.

Use it through a few proxies if you are that worried...

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

Set Square wrote:

As a matter of interest, just how easy/difficult is it to establish the true
identity of a poster. For example, where would I find the detailed headers
for *this* message? Are they likely to show any or all of:
* my News.Individual.net account ID
* the IP address from which I posted it
* my ISP
* my logon account name
* etc.?

OE does not make looking at the raw message quite as easy as most
newsreaders, but a quick CTRL+U (show message source) in mozzila give us:

Path:
ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net!nntp-xref-master.plus.net!ptn-nntp-spool01.plus.net!ptn-nntp-spool02.plus.net!ptn-nntp-spool03.plus.net!nntp-peering.plus.net!ptn-nntp-feeder03.plus.net!solnet.ch!solnet.ch!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: "Set Square"
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: OT: Anonymity of posts - was: Previous owners lied about works
done - Got them?
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 11:39:11 +0100
Lines: 29
Message-ID:
References:

. com

.com
X-Trace: individual.net faBkxWQldmr+t9Go3KahgQKmGv3NRps8C5TABKFQyTWTMEwJvF
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
Xref: ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net uk.d-i-y:125803

Which tells us your ISP plus other stuff like the software you are
using. Some ISPs news gateways will add more information to the headers
like the IP address posted from. So with help of Tiscali it would be
simple enough to get your real identity.

A bit of data mining would probably turn up a fair bit of info as well
but without any official involvement i.e. just collecting together all
the various snippits of personal information that you may have divulged
over the years in different posts.

As with all these things it is a case of knowing who you defending
against. For keeping Joe User from knowing who you are, there is
probabbly no need to do much given the chances are he won't want to know
anyway. If however you wanted to keep your ID secure from the national
security services you would have to work very hard indeed!.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

In article ,
Set Square wrote:
As a matter of interest, just how easy/difficult is it to establish the
true identity of a poster. For example, where would I find the detailed
headers for *this* message?

With Pluto, I simply click on an arrow to get header details.
Yours are below.

Path:
news-text.dial.pipex.com!lnewshfeed01.lnd.ops.eu.uu.net !master.news.eu.uu.net!lnewsspool00.lnd.ops.eu.uu. net!lnewsinpeer00.lnd.ops.eu.uu.net!emea.uu.net!ne wsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: "Set Square"
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: OT: Anonymity of posts - was: Previous owners lied about works
done - Got them?
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 11:39:11 +0100
Lines: 29
Message-ID:
References:

. com

.com
X-Trace: individual.net faBkxWQldmr+t9Go3KahgQKmGv3NRps8C5TABKFQyTWTMEwJvF
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
Xref: news-text.dial.pipex.com uk.d-i-y:501970

Of course, what it all means is totally beyond me.

--
*We waste time, so you don't have to *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Earl Kella wrote:
"Set Square" wrote in message
...
In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
wrote:


Your posts are in the public domain, on google no less, along with
headers, detailed descriptions of the problem, history, and stated and
explained intention to commit a crime. Your neighbours also know about
it now, and may or may not talk to the next inhabitant.

You must be dumb as well as dishonest.


NT

As a matter of interest, just how easy/difficult is it to establish the
true
identity of a poster. For example, where would I find the detailed headers
for *this* message? Are they likely to show any or all of:
* my News.Individual.net account ID
* the IP address from which I posted it
* my ISP
* my logon account name
* etc.?
--
Cheers,
Set Square
______

In the instance for example IF I were to do nothing and sell on to a new
buyer I think it is unlikely that anyone could match these posts with my
real identity. If they new my newsgroup id they may possibly match this
with rough location, but nothing definate. They would then have to get a
solicitor I imagine to approach tiscali for my real name and account
details.

Worst case scenario is that a new buyer moves in, structure collapses
and kills someone, and neighbour is interviewed by Police and advises
that you knew of the problem.
I don't think it would be a problem getting authorisation in that case
to trace your ip address.

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
John Rumm wrote:

Set Square wrote:

As a matter of interest, just how easy/difficult is it to establish
the true identity of a poster. For example, where would I find the
detailed headers for *this* message? Are they likely to show any or
all of:
* my News.Individual.net account ID
* the IP address from which I posted it
* my ISP
* my logon account name
* etc.?

OE does not make looking at the raw message quite as easy as most
newsreaders, but a quick CTRL+U (show message source) in mozzila give
us:

Path:

ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net!nntp-xref-master.plus.net!ptn-nntp-spool01.plus.n
et!ptn-nntp-spool02.plus.net!ptn-nntp-spool03.plus.net!nntp-peering.plus.net
!ptn-nntp-feeder03.plus.net!solnet.ch!solnet.ch!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!i
ndividual.net!not-for-mail
From: "Set Square"
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: OT: Anonymity of posts - was: Previous owners lied about
works done - Got them?
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 11:39:11 +0100
Lines: 29
Message-ID:
References:

. com

.com
X-Trace: individual.net
faBkxWQldmr+t9Go3KahgQKmGv3NRps8C5TABKFQyTWTMEwJvF X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
Xref: ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net uk.d-i-y:125803

Which tells us your ISP plus other stuff like the software you are
using. Some ISPs news gateways will add more information to the
headers like the IP address posted from. So with help of Tiscali it
would be simple enough to get your real identity.

A bit of data mining would probably turn up a fair bit of info as well
but without any official involvement i.e. just collecting together all
the various snippits of personal information that you may have
divulged over the years in different posts.

As with all these things it is a case of knowing who you defending
against. For keeping Joe User from knowing who you are, there is
probabbly no need to do much given the chances are he won't want to
know anyway. If however you wanted to keep your ID secure from the
national security services you would have to work very hard indeed!.


Interesting! So it's not *too* easy for Joe Public to establish a poster's
real identity without getting information from one's ISP - which they
*hopefully* wouldn't disclose without good reason.

FWIW, my ISP is *not* Tiscali - despite what the headers may lead you to
believe.
--
Cheers,
Set Square
______
Please reply to newsgroup. Reply address is invalid.

In article , "Set Square"
says...
In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
John Rumm wrote:

Set Square wrote:

As a matter of interest, just how easy/difficult is it to establish
the true identity of a poster. For example, where would I find the
detailed headers for *this* message? Are they likely to show any or
all of:
* my News.Individual.net account ID
* the IP address from which I posted it
* my ISP
* my logon account name
* etc.?

OE does not make looking at the raw message quite as easy as most
newsreaders, but a quick CTRL+U (show message source) in mozzila give
us:

Path:

ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net!nntp-xref-master.plus.net!ptn-nntp-spool01.plus.n
et!ptn-nntp-spool02.plus.net!ptn-nntp-spool03.plus.net!nntp-peering.plus.net
!ptn-nntp-feeder03.plus.net!solnet.ch!solnet.ch!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!i
ndividual.net!not-for-mail
From: "Set Square"
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: OT: Anonymity of posts - was: Previous owners lied about
works done - Got them?
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 11:39:11 +0100
Lines: 29
Message-ID:
References:

. com

.com
X-Trace: individual.net
faBkxWQldmr+t9Go3KahgQKmGv3NRps8C5TABKFQyTWTMEwJvF X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
Xref: ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net uk.d-i-y:125803

Which tells us your ISP plus other stuff like the software you are
using. Some ISPs news gateways will add more information to the
headers like the IP address posted from. So with help of Tiscali it
would be simple enough to get your real identity.

A bit of data mining would probably turn up a fair bit of info as well
but without any official involvement i.e. just collecting together all
the various snippits of personal information that you may have
divulged over the years in different posts.

As with all these things it is a case of knowing who you defending
against. For keeping Joe User from knowing who you are, there is
probabbly no need to do much given the chances are he won't want to
know anyway. If however you wanted to keep your ID secure from the
national security services you would have to work very hard indeed!.


Interesting! So it's not *too* easy for Joe Public to establish a poster's
real identity without getting information from one's ISP - which they
*hopefully* wouldn't disclose without good reason.

FWIW, my ISP is *not* Tiscali - despite what the headers may lead you to
believe.

The only things in your headers that reveal anything about you are
the From: address which you set yourself, and the Message-ID: and X-
Trace: which are set by news.individual.net and only meaningful to
them (unless someone has bothered to crack the encryption that they
use). Other NSPs may include different information, e.g. Google
Groups includes the IP address from which a post originates.
Presumably you mention Tiscali because it appears in References: but
that refers to the posts you are following up, not your own.
Other than that we can tell that your clock is set to BST and you're
using Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437, which doesn't really narrow
things down very much :-)
Even if someone has your IP address they can at best narrow it down
to a rough geographical location, or cross-reference it with other
communications (email, Usenet posts, locally hosted websites ...)
unless the address "belongs" to you (i.e. the DNS records point to a
company or personal domain rather than an ISP).