We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
"Rent money is dead money"
Options
Comments
-
Ah now London, I love London and my plan was to move there on leaving school....then I met hubby.
Not sure it would be my ideal now though as I crave the sound of the sea from one direction and the looking at the fields in the other...both of best worlds really.
Were you from Suffolk in the first place?...much enquiry having been made concerning a gentleman, who had quitted a company where Johnson was, and no information being obtained; at last Johnson observed, that 'he did not care to speak ill of any man behind his back, but he believed the gentleman was an attorney'.0 -
heheh , it was for the last 10 years... now rent money is 'save your life' money
Now Now,
I bought a BTL 2 years ago (yes Jan 2007) and the rental yield is sufficient.
Far more rent is received than the mortgage costs are
Now I'm not saying this is the case everywhere, but good property is still available in some areas where the rental market is stronger than the mortgage payments are.:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
Money spent buying a depreciating asset is dead money.
How?
After a typical 25 years, the current short term depreciating asset is fully yours and you no longer have to pay a monthly amount in order to live under a roof.
Can the same be said about rented accomodation?
Additionally, over 25 years, recorded history has shown that properties are never less than what was paid for them 25 years later:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
it depends purely on the situation.Debt @ LBM 29/12/08 - £49044! Now £44684.Fat loss 29/85lbs // £100 into £10k £243.07/£10kHSBC Loan 9658 // HSBC CC 3484 // HSBC CC 1464 // DP's 779 // Car 0% 4851 // Halifax OD 1348 // HSBC OD 1.5k // HSBC OD 1k // Barclays OD 400 // IOMOM 4400 // S Loan 15k // Cap1 £8000
-
Nope. A house is not an asset--it's HOME. Its where you LIVE. If you rent a council house you have security of tenure, if the floods come in or the roof flies off then they fix it... if you lose your job then you have help with your rent. Peace of mind v figures on paper. Depends which you want most. I would never ever buy a house .
And Council Homes are ten a plenty with the waiting lists negligable
:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »How?
After a typical 25 years, the current short term depreciating asset is fully yours and you no longer have to pay a monthly amount in order to live under a roof.
Can the same be said about rented accomodation?
Additionally, over 25 years, recorded history has shown that properties are never less than what was paid for them 25 years later
Agreed, but in 'recorded history' we have usually had large(ish) wage inflation to sort it out. This covers the maintainance costs, usually about 1-3% of the property's worth. Ie a property loses about 1-3% of it's value a year via wear and tear.
Eg if we assume a property of £100,000 and the halifax assumption that in the last 4 years property has not changed in value. That property will have deprecated by between (roughly) £4,000 and £12,000. Examples of costs include roofing, boiler, decoration, kitchen, appliances etc etc.
I'm not saying people shouldnt buy or rent. It's just that people forget about the costs of ownership. It's a bit like running a car. They need new brakes, tyres, oil, servicing etc etc. Why should property be any different.0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »Additionally, over 25 years, recorded history has shown that properties are never less than what was paid for them 25 years later
but it's different this time around!!
0 -
Agreed, but in 'recorded history' we have usually had large(ish) wage inflation to sort it out. This covers the maintainance costs, usually about 1-3% of the property's worth. Ie a property loses about 1-3% of it's value a year via wear and tear.
Eg if we assume a property of £100,000 and the halifax assumption that in the last 4 years property has not changed in value. That property will have deprecated by between (roughly) £4,000 and £12,000. Examples of costs include roofing, boiler, decoration, kitchen, appliances etc etc.
I'm not saying people shouldnt buy or rent. It's just that people forget about the costs of ownership. It's a bit like running a car. They need new brakes, tyres, oil, servicing etc etc. Why should property be any different.
Check your specific area for house prices in the last 4 years, it may not be as bad or indeed worse than the figures you show.
In my area according to RoSEA, property is up 75% in 4 years from Oct 04 - Oct 08, meaning your figures are way off for an average property in my area.
I do however, understand your underlying point regarding maintenance, roofs, windows, doors, boilers etc need to be maintained and are a yearly cost, however fast forward 20 years to when the mortgage is paid off. These maintenance costs are miniscule in comparison to the yearly rent paid.
Life expectancy is approx 78.7 years and if we presume on average people move away from the home as late as 25, that is still over 50 years where a roof is required over your head.
I'd rather pay a mortgage for less than 25 years, than rent in excess of 50 years
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
Agreed, but in 'recorded history' we have usually had large(ish) wage inflation to sort it out. This covers the maintainance costs, usually about 1-3% of the property's worth. Ie a property loses about 1-3% of it's value a year via wear and tear.
Do you not think there will be wage inflation over the next 25 years?:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »
Additionally, over 25 years, recorded history has shown that properties are never less than what was paid for them 25 years later
Am I going to have to wheel out my Black Death speech again?...much enquiry having been made concerning a gentleman, who had quitted a company where Johnson was, and no information being obtained; at last Johnson observed, that 'he did not care to speak ill of any man behind his back, but he believed the gentleman was an attorney'.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177K Life & Family
- 257.6K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards