Is It A Good Time To Buy?

kelou

Ouch! and I thought I had got away lightly;)

lostinrates

kelou wrote: »

Ouch! and I thought I had got away lightly;)

In all seriousness, it can get very...brash....in here. BUT, in general, I think if you are polite and reasoned people, apart from NDG don't bite hard....and if they do stand back and let those less polite jump on them. I think I get away very lightly and some of the worst ofenders DO tone down and make great posts

Max_Headroom_3

pickledpink wrote: »

Well this nutcase is solvent, mortgage-free, and owns a beautiful home.:p

Would you like me to send you a saucer of milk?:rotfl:

Miaow!:D

Allow me to correct that for you.

Well this nutcase says that he is solvent, mortgage-free, and owns a beautiful home.

Oh and by the way, I say that I'm posting this from the moon.

Max_Headroom_3

kelou wrote: »

I have been avoiding posting on this thread due to strong feelings on all sides, and I cant really decide myself which way I think the market will go, however, an interesting point a friend of my mums made was the changing demographic of this country, and how this effects the housing market. For example, more divorces and fractured families, or single people choosing to move out of their parents home and buy a flat, who all require somewhere to live, so that it could be argued that more property would be required to house the same number of people. Hope that I have written it in a way to make some sense!

This is a fair argument and until very recently was widely used (along with "we live on an island, can't build more land etc) to "prove" that there would not be a fall in house prices.

Thing is, demand on its own simply is not enough, it has to be matched by affordability, and it is that affordabilitythat has changed.

The other thing to note is that there is a lot of reference to "things getting back to normal". What we've had over the last (say) five years was not normal. The current situation (sensible multiples and deposit required) is actually normal.

So to those who suggest things will soon "bounce back" to how they've been over the last few years I've one question, how will that be funded?

mewbie_2

kelou wrote: »

I have been avoiding posting on this thread due to strong feelings on all sides, and I cant really decide myself which way I think the market will go, however, an interesting point a friend of my mums made was the changing demographic of this country, and how this effects the housing market. For example, more divorces and fractured families, or single people choosing to move out of their parents home and buy a flat, who all require somewhere to live, so that it could be argued that more property would be required to house the same number of people. Hope that I have written it in a way to make some sense!

I don't believe there is, or will be, a shortage of flats (luxury apartments) for many many years. Flats to rent, flats to buy, flats at auction, repossessed flats, and finally condemmed flats. Of all the properties heading for the crash, flats are way out there in front.

I would say that a 'luxury apartment' of the type favoured by the BTL brigade will be worth a third, maximum, of its top price within a year, maybe two. From glamour model to leper in a very short time.

rizla01

My Q is what will happen if the BS's reposess loads of property?

They have lent money on them and need their monies back but will, in all probability, have to sell at a loss to get rid. (for which they will, no doubt HAVE to offer more mortgages)

This will flood the market with cheap property and bring values down at the same time.

With lower values, more people will be able to jump on the property ladder and more mortgages will be available.


Those reposessed will end up renting. The existing renters with no black marks will end up buying and so the demand will increase and drive prices back up again, won't it?

The sooner the BS's reposess, the sooner the market will return, surely.

What's missing?

mewbie_2

I don't see them repossessing huge amounts, not enough to make a real difference. 50k this year, maybe 75k next and the year after. I suppose it's one potential supply of cheap housing. But not sure if they are likely to have so much funds, either before or after this set of repossessions.

The cheap properties will come at some stage, and yes at some stage people will begin buying. Very cautiously I imagine. When they might happen is anyone's guess. Oh, alright then, I'll have a go.

We are pencilled in for recession next year (Gordon has a 'window' before the election) so not in 2009.
2010 - is hopefully a tentative financial recovery? Not for housing, but maybe the markets.
No one is going to look at housing once this crash takes hold in the sheeple psyche until when... 2011 maybe?

Absolute guess work I admit. I am sure however that to borrow the old song, seems rather appropriate now, "things can only get worse".

rizla01

Todays news is not so good either.

Talk about delaying the innevitable.

A proposal for a new, regulated mortgage rescue plan would allow those who were unable to make repayments on their home loan to stay in their property as tenants. The rent would be paid to social landlords.

The Council of Mortgage Lenders said that mortgage rescue plans were being considered in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, with a handful of local authorities in England offering schemes.

Typically, a social landlord takes a share in the property, with the borrower paying a smaller mortgage for their share of the home and rent for the part of the property they no longer own. But the CML wants a standardised scheme across the UK, leaving repossession as a final resort and reducing the numbers going to unregulated private offers of sale and lease back

Help should be available for those who can't pay, not those who won't pay


Council of Mortgage Lenders

Max_Headroom_3

rizla01 wrote: »

My Q is what will happen if the BS's reposess loads of property?

They have lent money on them and need their monies back but will, in all probability, have to sell at a loss to get rid. (for which they will, no doubt HAVE to offer more mortgages)

This will flood the market with cheap property and bring values down at the same time.

With lower values, more people will be able to jump on the property ladder and more mortgages will be available.


Those reposessed will end up renting. The existing renters with no black marks will end up buying and so the demand will increase and drive prices back up again, won't it?

The sooner the BS's reposess, the sooner the market will return, surely.

What's missing?

Assuming that by "market returning" you mean things going back to how they were, then your answer in one word, is money.

Banks simply won't be prepared (or able) to lend the sheer quantities of cash as loosely as they have been doing, and so without that fuel, the fire cannot burn as hot, no matter how much it is stoked.

The boom we've experienced was created by easy money for everyone, regardless of circumstance or deposit fuelling massive price rises as everyone had much more (borrowed) money to spend. Those days are now gone.

rizla01

Well I don't profess to be an expert on banking practices & procedures but banks have always relied on lending money and investing money to fund interest rates, so without these two practices how do you think banks will exist in the future?

They did OK before the excessive 'Boom' so why not again?

They will need to be more cautious about who they lend to in the future but they will still need to lend.

I can see charges levied for banking services being increased in the short term but competition will soon kill that off.

Banks will simply disappear if they dont provide a service to the country, surely?

It wasn't silly prices that led to this fiasco - just inappropriate lending by greedy institutions turning a blind eye to the 'What ifs'.

Like i said, I am no expert so if you have the answer, rather than speculation based on the present situation, then please enlighten us all.