FTB expectations too high?

neverdespairgirl

Really2 wrote: »

Slightly confusing did your dads parents buy one house in their lifetime and live in it until they retired.
As your dad only ever lived in one house or his brother?

But I would suspect the early 1900's owner owner ship was not the norm and if you were an owner I would imagine you would be well of so a large house possibly.

My Dad and uncle's parents bought their house at the end of the 2nd World War. A 2 bed terrace. They then had my uncle, and 2 years later, my Dad. The whole family continued to live cheerfully in the same house, and my Dad left to go to uni and never moved back full-time (holidays, etc, but not living there). My grandparents retired, grandfather died pretty soon after, and my grandmother and uncle then moved down south. So my uncle is 60, and has only ever lived in 2 houses in his entire life.

We aren't talking the early 1900s, here, my Dad's 58, not 98!

neverdespairgirl

neas wrote: »

She will be 30/31 when she finishes so maybe not looking too good for kids, but its a risk we need to take as she dislikes her job sooo much

30 / 31 isn't exactly bus pass territory for children!

lynzpower

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

30 / 31 isn't exactly bus pass territory for children!

it better not be :eek:

skap7309

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

30 / 31 isn't exactly bus pass territory for children!

Better not be, my better half has just turned 31 :eek:;)

whathavewedone

30/31 is not old to have a baby!

Really2

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

My Dad and uncle's parents bought their house at the end of the 2nd World War. A 2 bed terrace. They then had my uncle, and 2 years later, my Dad. The whole family continued to live cheerfully in the same house, and my Dad left to go to uni and never moved back full-time (holidays, etc, but not living there). My grandparents retired, grandfather died pretty soon after, and my grandmother and uncle then moved down south. So my uncle is 60, and has only ever lived in 2 houses in his entire life.

We aren't talking the early 1900s, here, my Dad's 58, not 98!

So i presume buy your answer your dad hast traded up in his lifetime.;)
I can understand you may have one relative who never, but trading up in the housing market is the norm. All my relatives have done it and I should imagine most home owners in the UK have.
I don't want to go to much in to family specifics because my coment was just a general one about the UK as a whole. (their are bound to be exceptions and I am only talking about over half of housholders)

I presume that is why property is described as a "ladder", you can go up or down it.

Really2

whathavewedone wrote: »

30/31 is not old to have a baby!

True I was 31 when we had our baby my wife was 36.

IveSeenTheLight

skap7309 wrote: »

Why not if you have worked bl00dy hard for it? As a 26 year old FTB I have literally put my life on hold to save a substantial deposit over the last few years as it is what i want to do. Wages of 50k and a planned 40% deposit means a 4 bed detached are realistically within reach in my area. The longer i wait the bigger the floorspace becomes.

Am I picking up that you as a FTBer find property affordable because you have saved up for a deposit and that you are not planning to take advantage of prices lowering to secure a lower mortgage but that you will maintain the same mortgage but be able to get a larger property?

So in short you find properties in your area as a FTB affordable

SandC

It's obviously a completely different scenario if a FTB is single or a couple. If a couple can get a 3 bed house with a garage on 2.5x their joint salary then why not? But there are far more single people than there were 20/30/40 years ago buying properties. It just wasn't the done thing for a single person to buy a house - they would rent a flat or share or stay with parents.

Well if I'd waited until finding a significant other to marry or live with I'd still be living with the folks now at the age of 38. Times change!

In a way FTBs over the past 10 years have had it better - but only in their minds when they have been allowed to borrow so much more money than their salaries dictate, when they have been allowed to have interest free mortgages without supplying any proof of how they are going to pay the balance off at the end of the term, how they could buy things interest free over a period of time, get finance to buy cars and then when prices shot up be allowed to spend part or nearly all of the equity on their homes on whatever they liked (more often than not, more luxuries that are seen as essential). But it was all a falsehood. Who is to blame for that? Government, lenders and borrowers alike. And society as a whole for the 'have now' culture.

I still see the shift in attitude being a long way off when house prices become more affordable for the first time buyer that they will be happy to live in their first purchase with second hand furniture that is all mismatched and without holidays, meals out, going drinking, buying all the clothes they want etc. etc.

As a home owner myself I don't worry about house prices falling and mine being worth less. My equity is worth nothing. I didn't fall into the trap of the 'must haves' by MEWing. I saved (and still do) for the incidentals. My mortgage is now, of course, a lot smaller than when I bought in 1995.

Graham_Devon

SandC wrote: »

It's obviously a completely different scenario if a FTB is single or a couple. If a couple can get a 3 bed house with a garage on 2.5x their joint salary then why not? But there are far more single people than there were 20/30/40 years ago buying properties. It just wasn't the done thing for a single person to buy a house - they would rent a flat or share or stay with parents.

Well if I'd waited until finding a significant other to marry or live with I'd still be living with the folks now at the age of 38. Times change!

In a way FTBs over the past 10 years have had it better - but only in their minds when they have been allowed to borrow so much more money than their salaries dictate, when they have been allowed to have interest free mortgages without supplying any proof of how they are going to pay the balance off at the end of the term, how they could buy things interest free over a period of time, get finance to buy cars and then when prices shot up be allowed to spend part or nearly all of the equity on their homes on whatever they liked (more often than not, more luxuries that are seen as essential). But it was all a falsehood. Who is to blame for that? Government, lenders and borrowers alike. And society as a whole for the 'have now' culture.

I still see the shift in attitude being a long way off when house prices become more affordable for the first time buyer that they will be happy to live in their first purchase with second hand furniture that is all mismatched and without holidays, meals out, going drinking, buying all the clothes they want etc. etc.

As a home owner myself I don't worry about house prices falling and mine being worth less. My equity is worth nothing. I didn't fall into the trap of the 'must haves' by MEWing. I saved (and still do) for the incidentals. My mortgage is now, of course, a lot smaller than when I bought in 1995.

Theres a hell of a lot of holier than thou in these posts?

I have never done all this. I have paid every debt I have owed, on time, each month, I go to work to pay my way, I have credit cards, but use them knowing I have to pay it off.

I don't have all that you are describing people to have? I'm still on 30k a year and find it immensly difficult, (actually impossible) to buy my own house, hence shared ownership.

I have a 90% mortgage, not a 100+, not living on interest free credit.

Neither do you speak for any of my friends my age, or indeed, any people my age at work. Were all struggling, and the way you see us, is far from what we are.