We went with a local credit union bc we have had great experience with them in the past, and we have good hx with them (2 paid off car loans, and a refinanced mortgage on our current house). In fact, when they appraised (different appraiser though) our current house last year, they assessed it at $25K higher than we paid 2 yrs prior to buy it. We have put a few improvements in, but no where near that amt. We did appeal the initial appraisal bc the comps they used we felt were not even close to our new build. AND they did not do ANY comparisons to new builds. There is actually a new build right around the corner from us, but he is using private funds and insurance money, as his previous house burned down. So even though he is building upwards of a 750K home (much higher than our proposal), they did not take that into consideration. Most of the recently solds were on less than 1/2 acre in a tract, whereas ours is 2 full wooded acres in a substantially more upscale "development." (Not really a true development, but a large area that used to be undeveloped and farm land that is slowly being parcelled off and built, all by various contractors. None of the comps had higher than standard 8ft ceilings. None had wood stained trim or upgraded windows. All were vinyl siding. None had any built-ins....we have several throughout. Ours has increased insulation (closed cell foam and blown in versus mainly fiberglass), high quality windows, 2x6 construction, stone around the entire foundation, etc. I found several recent sales in the $140/sq ft range but they said they "comped" the same, and really did not seem to take the price per square footage into consideration. They only gave us $17/sq foot for our 1590 sq ft basement, even though we pointed out that we were roughing that in now and finishing it (probably ourselves) within the year to include a media room and in-law suite. I was also very confused by several adjustments they made to the comps prices. For instances adding $2200 to the value of one bc it was on a 0.9 acre tract, when ours is 2 acres. ADDING $32000 to the same one bc it was 7 years old and not new?? Adding $44,650 to it bc it was 3 bed, 2.5 baths and 30000sq ft where ours is 5bes 4 baths and 3893 sq ft. Very confusing. We did find one comp that is still for sale in a price range close to our cost to build (actually a bit higher) and similar in upgrades, etc they had this response: "The above listing is a perfect example of an atypical over improvement for the area. The marketability is greatly affected. Price is discounted, marketing time is abnormal." The house has only been on the market for 30 days, so not sure how that is abnormal. Yes, the price is about $100K higher than the assessed price, but I thought the assessed price was very low for the upgrades they had done, and wonder if they did it on the "down-low" - i.e. not pulling permits, etc and never had it reassessed. While the real estate market IS slow here (where is it not) there are still a fair amt of sales, and definitely NO WHERE near 50% of them being bank owned or short sales. Here is a direct quote from the appraiser in response to our appeal with higher comps and pointing out all of our upgrades: "The proposed construction is an over improvement for the area (super adequacy). It suffers from regression being the most expensive home in an area without a high degree of conformity to support the value. The cost approach may support the construction price, however due to the area and lack of supporting sales, the sales comparison approach will not support the construction cost." The bank liason actually seemed quite surprised with the initial appraisal AND appeal. He also said due to industry regulations, they are no longer even allowed to order a 2nd appraisal. I think part of the issue (why we are building in the first place) is that we have such specific needs and have found NOTHING existing that would satisfy those. We have NO plans of selling this house any time in the near (and by that I mean at least 15-20 years) future. But of course, the bank doesn't care about that. So, we are looking into how we can redesign our dream plans into a cheaper design. I will definitely post the plans here for input. I have posted them piecemeal up until now, but never the entire project. The original design had a steep A frame roof which we knew was a large chunk of the cost, so simply redesigning that would help, though not $100K of help. We are also going to sit down with our builder and find out what he suggests. Thanks for your input so far.

Do you have a basement? I would take off that nice new counter, sinks, and faucets all in one piece and put it somewhere safe for a resale if a buyer objects to your new set-up and wants two sinks back. Then for you, start with the new top of your choice. Get a comfortable large sink with some style, or a nice big undermount - easy to wipe the counter clean.. On the left end of the vanity that you do not use. you can place tall narrow cabinet. If you are a coffee drinker and want the luxury of a cup right in the bedroom, you can put a little "garage" at the bottom and put an electric outlet inside. Or if you have arthritis and would like a wax bath for your hands, or have any other small appliances that need a place to charge out of sight, a kitchen-style garage can be helpful in a bathroom. You can use little doors instead of the slatted roll-top desk style that is dated. The cabinet can hold the things on your open wire shelves. You could put three curved open wood shelves on the right side of the new cabinet so that you could set your "daily use" things there within reach. The shelves on the side of the cabinet will keep the cabinet from looking so square and like it just landed there.

Liltingbelle, I know that in the U.S., one can invest in tax-free munis (municipal bonds), but possibly the avoidance of income tax on the earning means that the price of the asset may be relatively higher than on comparable investments where the payouts are taxable. I can not give advice relative to the tax position of the sale of the home, but it appears that, if it was owner-occupied for a certain amount of time in the past number of years, you can receive the proceeds free of tax. I'd suggest that you check that with I.R.S. Also ask I.R.S. about tax status of U.S. income while you live abroad - and it varies depending on the amount of time that one's resident abroad, I think. Often there's withholding, I think, before payer can pay you. If you invest where the amount of principal is guaranteed, that is, the borrower guarantees to return every dollar of the principal (plus rent on the money throughout the period of the loan) at the conclusion of the contract - there's almost always another guarantee that they never happen to mention - they won't give you one dollar more, either. The rent on the money is all that you'll get with regard to that portion of your asset durig that period. There are two rats that eat your cheese. The income tax people want to talk to you annually about every dollar of your income during that period. In Canada, some kinds of income, employment earnings, resultant pension (apart from a small portion that's deductible) and interest earnings (the kinds that most people earn) are taxed at top rate. However, some kinds are taxed at a lower rate, and the taxation may be deferred - generally, the kinds used by somewhat wealthy people. Suppose you loaned $10,000. to a bank in a Guaranteed Certificate 15 years ago,for a 5 year term, and renewed it twice. If it came due tomorrow - they'd pay you exactly $10,000. Which would have bought a decent car 15 years ago: not now. The other rat that eats your cheese is inflation. If the number of dollars that you invested can't grow, then you must add part of current earnings, more or less the value of inflation, with the invested asset annually in order to maintain the purchasing power of that asset over time. So - after you pay income tax on your current earnings ... ... and add part of the current earnings to the basic asset in order to maintain purchasing power ... ... you get to keep what's left. Which in recent years has sometimes been a minus amount. Cause you know what? The rats eat first! I must admit to a bias - for longer-term investing I prefer to invest into an asset where I expect that the value of the asset may well increase, over time. Also, where one invests as one usually does, with a small amount saved and added to the invested base regularly over an extended period. If I can invest into a situation where the amont that the investment pays increases from time to time, I like that even better. For example, I bought a stock 38 years ago for about $2.08 or $4.15 a share, that paid about 6 cents or a dime, annually. Prices fluctuated during the period - I remember that once a share could be sold for $56. and somwhat later for $24. (but I'm not sure whether the second figure was after one of the splits) and recently ran around $70. - 80. per share. They had exposure to the Enron fiasco, and were assessed a much larger amount of the settlement than they expected, I think - was that partly because they're a non-U.S. bank, and U.S. banks weren't assessed as heavily? Who knows! The nice part is that I don't have to answer to the Canada Revenue Agency for the increased value of the shares until I either sell the shares or die - and I don't plan to do either this week or next. I got a nice surpris earlier this week - the value of annual dividend was increased from $2.64 (was $2.48 not long ago) I think it was, to $2.76 - that was originally about 6 cents to a dime. Also - that kind of income is taxed so that it takes about $1.25 - $1.30 or so of interest to leave as much in pocket after paying tax as $1.00 of dividends on Canadian stock. I'm not sure whether the shares split twice or three times during that 38 years. I'm not about to sell them, any time soon. Good wishes to you and yours. ole joyful P.S. Having some trouble with editing out unwanted letters and adding some where needed - as I'm at the library (son working on a better computer for me) and forgot my glasses. Had a spare set in the car a while ago, but took them into house - and they're still there. Extra set in brief case - but it's at home, also. Nuts! o j

Timing is messed up by simple things like needle in the wrong position too, or threading needle the wrong way. So (!!) easy to get wrong when going from one model to another. Timing is all about the point when the over thread picks up the under thread, and the movment of all the parts for the two threads to meet at exactly the right spot. When this doesn't happen it skips stiches or they will not form at all. Three layers of cotton napkin material is nothing for a 404. When it skips stiches it is usually threading, needle or some setup issue. This will mess up timing. The first thing to check is correct threading and the way the needle is put in. Second is a good clean up, as the years go by a lot of lint and muck can gather around the bobbin and the feed dog. Alwasy do a good oiling when you take out the machine. For difficult vinyl it might help to use one of those leather needles with sharp knife like edges, but as long as the needle punctures the fabric with out working too hard, and the fabric moves fine over the feed dogs it's not a must.