Repos up a staggering 92% iYear on Year

chucky

Cannon_Fodder wrote: »

Do we have any surveyors/valuers, who can advise if they set the "street price" on 'any sale', or ignoring repos ??

Would lenders shoot the valuers for not protecting them from the risk of further prices drops on that street, if they ignored a repo?

they're all looking after their own interests unfortunately

Cannon_Fodder

Really2 wrote: »

No Goods in general.
Sorry i am a business man.

Ok, thanks for clarifying.

Max_Headroom_3

The point is however that it's the houses on the market and being sold that set prices. The fact that a lot of people may choose not to sell is irrelevent.

I may choose not to sell my house as it's dropped in value, but if the house next door is repossessed and sells for half what I think mine was worth then that sets the new market rate. My house sets nothing, it's not on the market.

Cannon_Fodder

chucky wrote: »

they're all looking after their own interests unfortunately

exactly, so the lender does not know if a repo will make the street become known as below average in the locality, so may want some protection from the potential impact on the whole street ?

and the valuer doesn't want to make a botch that damages his relationship with lenders, so even if not directly applying the repo price, may be erring on the low side to cover his backside ?

= 1 repo may not *set* the price of the street, but it could dent it ?

chucky

Max_Headroom wrote: »

The point is however that it's the houses on the market and being sold that set prices. The fact that a lot of people may choose not to sell is irrelevent.

I may choose not to sell my house as it's dropped in value, but if the house next door is repossessed and sells for half what I think mine was worth then that sets the new market rate. My house sets nothing, it's not on the market.

how many repos can you by compared to non-repos on the same street?

repos have limited supply. their owners (the banks) will not hold out for a "good" price like a homeowner would who doesn't need to sell. the bank will usually accept the first reasonable offer that comes in to them.

chucky

Cannon_Fodder wrote: »

= 1 repo may not *set* the price of the street, but it could dent it ?

yes it will do - it would get worse because EA's will always use that to get their point across to a seller.

they need the sales!!

Really2

chucky wrote: »

yes it will do - it would get worse because EA's will always use that to get their point across to a seller.

they need the sales!!

Which brings us back nicely to the point non forced sellers will not compete with repos.

there is no evidence whatsoever stating the number of non forced sellers incresess as prices fall.
I have actulay submited evidence that the numbers of propertys coming on to the market is significantly down YOY even with repos rising.

And for some unknown reason people on here think every body is going to go
"damn we are half way through a crash and in a recession it's time to sell"

It defys any logic at all other than buyers wanting to increase the numbers of houses on sale to assist drops.
Sorry sellers tend not to think "this is most probably the worst time to sell, lets sell"

Cannon_Fodder

Really2 wrote: »

Did you buy both times in a falling market.

First house June 1990, when my mate (the estate agent) said he thought the 89 blip was over...but who had a crystal ball? - no MSE back then!! It hadn't happened before!!...(no knowledge of the 70s crash at all, just like todays early-20s know nothing about 89-91 crash)...but at least bought for 25% less than neighbour had!

But to be honest, I was fed up with being at the parents, so would have bought anyway - at 12% IR, mind, though it was still affordable.

Second house January 1997, sold the first for less than I bought it coz the crash continued well below and had not fully recovered, but wanted to move anyway and my employer-based mortgage allowed it to absorb the small amount of NE.

Just an ordinary job bloggs, just like millions out there who haven't even heard of MSE, so how are the public going to be stopped from thinking its all over, this spring, this time?

People didn't stop buying/selling, but it wasn't enough to stop the crash in the 90s...

...I don't expect it will this time either.

Really2

Cannon_Fodder wrote: »

First house June 1990, when my mate (the estate agent) said he thought the 89 blip was over...but who had a crystal ball? - no MSE back then!! It hadn't happened before!!...(no knowledge of the 70s crash at all, just like todays early-20s know nothing about 89-91 crash)...but at least bought for 25% less than neighbour had!

.

Not a Dig, but why did you not sell that house as prices in real terms continued to fall for another 5 years?
According to what some are saying because prices are falling more owners will sell becuase prices are falling.
I think now you get where I am coming from.
Perhaps in hindsight it would have been better to sell a year later. But the reality is you knew you would have to price it under the cheapest equiverlent to guarantee a sale.
Would you of actualy have been any better off in reality (mortgage cheaper than renting etc) and would you of actualy sold with all what was going on?
Also you did not lose it and can vouch things got better.
All these things go through the mind of someone thinking to sell detering them from selling.
Unfortunatly if you are forced you have not got the choice.

MyOpinion

mbga9pgf wrote: »

Wait and see!

If you have an expensive X5 on costly finance, do you stick with it when money is tight or do you downsize?

Have a look in your local 4X4 dealership and see what I mean.

Exactly the same concept.

I would but my local 4X4 garage closed down, maybe they moved to bigger premises but something makes me think that this isn't the case.