Incentives for users to buy my property

phil_b_2

I think the wording of the thread title is wrong. You use the word 'incentive' where as what you propose is more of an 'aid'. I mean, an incentive would be simply dropping the price by 15k or throwing your car in on the bargain, but what you want to do is actually enable FTB's to get a mortgage which they otherwise wouldnt be able to get, to buy your house.

In that case I'd say go for it if it can be done legally. You havent really got anything to lose and it may widen your potential market.

I have seen plenty of private ads stating '5% deposit paid' etc... by the way.

carolt

phil_b wrote: »

I think the wording of the thread title is wrong. You use the word 'incentive' where as what you propose is more of an 'aid'. I mean, an incentive would be simply dropping the price by 15k or throwing your car in on the bargain, but what you want to do is actually enable FTB's to get a mortgage which they otherwise wouldnt be able to get, to buy your house.

In that case I'd say go for it if it can be done legally. You havent really got anything to lose and it may widen your potential market.

I have seen plenty of private ads stating '5% deposit paid' etc... by the way.

Wow, you must live in a really undesirable area!

carolt

pickles110564 wrote: »

What is that saying..................The lady doth protest too much.

Carolt you are the desperate one.:rotfl:

Oooh yes, you're so right.

Desperate to:

end up in negative equity
pay twice my monthly rent in interest costs alone
be made homeless
be stuck and unable to move owing to said negative equity
have no disposable income whatsoever so that I have 2 work 2 or 3 jobs just to survive
have zero quality of life
spend years saving just to pay back the equity I owe to the bank
be unable to sleep as I worry about the thousands being lost in equity monthly....


How could I not be? :rolleyes:

pickles110564

carolt wrote: »

Oooh yes, you're so right.

Desperate to:

end up in negative equity
pay twice my monthly rent in interest costs alone
be made homeless
be stuck and unable to move owing to said negative equity
have no disposable income whatsoever so that I have 2 work 2 or 3 jobs just to survive
have zero quality of life
spend years saving just to pay back the equity I owe to the bank
be unable to sleep as I worry about the thousands being lost in equity monthly....


How could I not be? :rolleyes:

Thanx for making it so clear, dont worry it will end up ok in the end.;)

mr.broderick

carolt wrote: »

Oooh yes, you're so right.

Desperate to:

end up in negative equity
pay twice my monthly rent in interest costs alone
be made homeless
be stuck and unable to move owing to said negative equity
have no disposable income whatsoever so that I have 2 work 2 or 3 jobs just to survive
have zero quality of life
spend years saving just to pay back the equity I owe to the bank
be unable to sleep as I worry about the thousands being lost in equity monthly....


How could I not be? :rolleyes:

Just stay in rented then carol...job done.

neas

mr.broderick wrote: »

Just stay in rented then carol...job done.

First sound advice I heard from you in a long time.Keep renting.. and then buy when prices are lower... sound advice.. Well done broderick... a change in your ways maybe?

mr.broderick

neas wrote: »

First sound advice I heard from you in a long time.Keep renting.. and then buy when prices are lower... sound advice.. Well done broderick... a change in your ways maybe?

I do try my best neas.

Dithering_Dad

carolt wrote: »

Oooh yes, you're so right.

Desperate to:

end up in negative equity
pay twice my monthly rent in interest costs alone
be made homeless
be stuck and unable to move owing to said negative equity
have no disposable income whatsoever so that I have 2 work 2 or 3 jobs just to survive
have zero quality of life
spend years saving just to pay back the equity I owe to the bank
be unable to sleep as I worry about the thousands being lost in equity monthly....


How could I not be? :rolleyes:

If it really is the case that rental costs in your area are half what it would cost you to buy with an interest only mortgage, then by your own statements you will always be in rented accomodation, because unless houseprices half in value renting (in your area) will always be cheaper.

As far as the other criteria you listed, if you're afraid of adjustments in property values (these happen about once per decade) and not having the freedom to move around, I'd suggest that renting is perfect for you and I'm actually surprised that you're even considering buying a place?

Just to open the debate a little, do people think home-ownership is now so ingrained into the mindset of British people that even the most vociferous renter secretly wants a home of their own?

I travel a lot around Europe and much less people there own their own homes, or even want to. I guess this may be because their leases are much longer and they're free to make the property feel more like their own home (decorating, furnishing and gardening)?

If I rented in the UK from a BTL landlord, I doubt I'd feel secure enough to make any sort of alterations; I'd either lose my deposit for 'damaging' the property or lose the accomodation when the BTLer sold it. Perhaps the guaranteed leases should be increased from 6 months to 6 years? That'd get rid of the 'fly by night' landlords just out for a quick equity profit?

dubsey

phil_b wrote: »

I have seen plenty of private ads stating '5% deposit paid' etc... by the way.

Here in Kent LOADS of properties have this type of thing now - 5% deposit paid, stamp duty paid, cashback offers but I'm afraid it doesn't sell the properties, they have still sat there for the last year. The only properties that have turned to sold have been those that have had a significant price drop, or those coming new (genuinely new, not different agent) to the market but at a good price.

Unfortunately an awful lot of those return to 'available' within weeks if not days. The only way to get a buyer and ensure they will be able to proceed is by keeping their lender happy and the only way you'll do that is by pricing correctly to start with.

lostinrates

Dithering_Dad wrote: »

Just to open the debate a little, do people think home-ownership is now so ingrained into the mindset of British people that even the most vociferous renter secretly wants a home of their own?

I travel a lot around Europe and much less people there own their own homes, or even want to. I guess this may be because their leases are much longer and they're free to make the property feel more like their own home (decorating, furnishing and gardening)?

quote]


Yes, I think that property ownership is deeply, possibly too deeply ingrained in UK. I think a lot of pople would be better off renting for life. BUT so many people have done 'well' out of seeing house value rise recently its just made it seem like more of an investment. I think also there has been a dramatic shift in how the 'investment' of property has been seen: as an investment for lifetime realisation, not an investment for future generations.

Re rental in Europe, well, yes. It was very, very hard for us to find anything other than the standard Itlian 4+4 year lease, and those with shorter or annual leases were at a premium. But, I believe tax on renting a property is such that many privately owned/long term leased properties sit empty in expensive city areas because the hassle of renting them out versus the tax payable is not worth while.

Also, in Italy and France at least (the only two I have lived in), while people are prepared to rent very happily in the major cities, lots and lots and lots of people have second homes, owned homes, out of the cities. These are more likely to be owned, and again, sit emoty when not owner occupied. Thus far more modest people are people of two homes (whether both owned or one leased one owned). They are less likely to be seen as an investment and much more likely to be empty for long periods of time. But, if the property does dramatically go up, they have at least a foot hold in their second home.

there is a dramatically lower turnover...people don't move 'for fun'. The long leases are a bonus for a great many people, but they also can result in difficulty. Sharing rooms among single adults on low incomes is very, very common, and all the students I met shared rooms in very low standard accomodation. People felt tied into jobs because of the very long leases too....oppertunities to get up and leave the city you live in are less easily taken...paying off half of an assured tenancy in Uk for 3 months is one thing, getting out of a four year contract another!

In fact, in Italy, there is an additional problem, unfurnished really means unfurnished...no kitchen, no bathroom suite, often no boiler...ther are for the tenant to fit. Thus, your tenant is often captive by the costs of moving as much as anything else at the end of the 4 year period. Furthermore, landlords have fewer responsibilites of maintainance and repair (only serious structural repair) pipe work etc often comes down to tenants

Thus while rent increases are also limited by the contract length, the ease of the investment is better (far fewer costs for landlords as a result of the no maintance thing, and an assured tenancy for the long duration means investment is more stable)


However, besides all I have said about the view that property is less viewed as an investment 'at home' there a lot of 'upper middle class' italians and french I know HAVE made property investments......in UK property.