Whither house prices? The BBC's take on 2009

[Deleted User]

whathavewedone wrote: »

But so long as people can afford to pay their mortgages, so what?

I think thats the point, people are being made redundant, others comming to the end of a fixed rate deal and cannot get remortgaged along with the overstretched BTLers.

There are plenty of people which will be just fine, but there will also be more than plenty which will not.

Lifeisbutadream

Supercharge_Me wrote: »

I think thats the point, people are being made redundant, others comming to the end of a fixed rate deal and cannot get remortgaged along with the overstretched BTLers.

There are plenty of people which will be just fine, but there will also be more than plenty which will not.

We have a mortgage of £110K and a house valued at £230K and we cant currently get a mortgage (we are both self-employed) - we are also on a very high fixed rate (7.9%) - we can afford the mortgage repayments but I would prefer to re-mortgage and pay a bit less!

mitchaa

Lifeisbutadream wrote: »

We have a mortgage of £110K and a house valued at £230K and we cant currently get a mortgage (we are both self-employed) - we are also on a very high fixed rate (7.9%) - we can afford the mortgage repayments but I would prefer to re-mortgage and pay a bit less!

Why cant you get a mortgage? Are you paying yourself peanuts to avoid the taxman (cant have it both ways) or is the work not coming in?

You should be getting a cracking rate at around 4% with a sub 50% LTV rate.

mvengemvenge

ess0two wrote: »

Must have a gash like an axe wound also.

I'd love to incorporate that into a chat-up line:D

caveman38

Originally Posted by !!!!!!?
Once prices come down to a reasonable level where buyers can afford to borrow a sensible amount (max 3.5x single or 2.5x joint multiple of income), prices will stabilise and the banks can start lending in earnest.

chucky wrote: »

so extremely nice areas would have to have the same price as less nice areas due to these restrictive income multipliers.

those are exactly the same income multipliers that were around in the 80s - a few things have changed since then.

No, those that earn more will afford better homes based on 3.5 X their income. The same as it's always been.

smartn

caveman38 wrote: »

Originally Posted by !!!!!!?
Once prices come down to a reasonable level where buyers can afford to borrow a sensible amount (max 3.5x single or 2.5x joint multiple of income), prices will stabilise and the banks can start lending in earnest.


No, those that earn more will afford better homes based on 3.5 X their income. The same as it's always been.

Or theres always the option of saving more and climbing up the ladder as people always used to.......

Lifeisbutadream

mitchaa wrote: »

Why cant you get a mortgage? Are you paying yourself peanuts to avoid the taxman (cant have it both ways) or is the work not coming in?

You should be getting a cracking rate at around 4% with a sub 50% LTV rate.

No not paying myself peanuts to avoid the taxman! if only! we arent a limited company anyway..

We have only been trading for 3 years (me and OH in partnership) - the first year we made £16K the second year around £20K and this year is the first year we made anything near worthwhile, but because they are clamping down the mortgage companies are not making it easy for anyone. I am sure we will get something eventually, but we could do with it happenning sooner rather than later.

RobertoMoir

pickles110564 wrote: »

Problem is that some people on low incomes would love to own but will never get the chance, this is so wrong as everybody should have the right to own their own homes.

Why is it a right? I have some sympathy with the idea that everyone should have the opportunity to buy their own home*, but saying you have a right to own your own home is a bit strong.

What you've said is that if I need a 4 bedroom house for my family but can only afford to pay £100 and a sack of potatoes for it, then I should be able to buy at that price because I'm entitled to it as part of my right to own a home. And I'm pretty sure that's not quite fair on the sellers, who probably think they have a bit of a "right" to sell at or over the current market price (for what that's worth right now).

* actually there are problems with this too but lets keep this post relatively short and focussed.

chucky

caveman38 wrote: »

Originally Posted by !!!!!!?
Once prices come down to a reasonable level where buyers can afford to borrow a sensible amount (max 3.5x single or 2.5x joint multiple of income), prices will stabilise and the banks can start lending in earnest.


No, those that earn more will afford better homes based on 3.5 X their income. The same as it's always been.

that's a romantic dream that you have going on there. it was never like that.
if you didn't have a deposit or enough deposit you would go and live in Wigan where it was more affordable for you otherwise you would live in a more expensive area.

how about saving more with a bigger deposit and still keeping that salary multiplier or did you want all homes to be restricted to your romantic multiplier calculation.

caveman38

chucky wrote: »

that's a romantic dream that you have going on there. it was never like that.
if you didn't have a deposit or enough deposit you would go and live in Wigan where it was more affordable for you otherwise you would live in a more expensive area.

how about saving more with a bigger deposit and still keeping that salary multiplier or did you want all homes to be restricted to your romantic multiplier calculation.

Deposits, I don't beleive were mentioned, only mortgages. I still maintain that the guy with the higher salary, who can get the higher mortgage will afford the better properties. What's confusing about that.