If house prices fall another 37% ...

Kenny4315

Dan: wrote: »

I think he means that those on minimum wage can buy a 3 bed semi.

3 bed semi ..... my arze he means .... a 5 bedroomed detached.

With paddocks and a large pool complex. :money:

Kenny4315

:money: :money: :money: :money: :money: :money: :money: :money: :money: :money: :money: :money: :money:

I couldn't resist a bit of MEWBIE badgering.

themanbearpig

Kenny4315 wrote: »

Most graduates are not in employment till 22, and even then many are on training schemes, or part-time employment. So 3 years in employment learning the ropes and paying off some student debt, and then they'd like buying without having to do anything, just move in and put their feet up......buying a house given the size of the purchase should be something that a real value of workload is placed upon.

It devalues the whole house buying thing if the average house price sinks to low, and therefore makes other stuff like cars, tv's holidays, and the like become comparatively more.

Why must there be any value in saving, and scraping togather a huge amount of cash for 10 years just to become eligible for a lifetime of debt, just to get a roof over your head?
The only people that benefit are those higher up in the pyramid sche..oh sorry property ladder.

Shelter isn't comparable to a Big screen TV or an exotic holiday. Its a fundamental necessity of life, which shouldn't be subject to such insane entry requirements.

The current property culture is not healthy. The stock market exists so people can make money through speculation. Property should not be an investment vehicle, and it should be the job of the government to ensure it doesnt become one. Unfortunately I can't see this happening while the "baby boomer" generation are still alive and in control.

Maggy got it wrong, the anglo-saxon economic model we have followed for the last 20 years must change.

Kenny4315

themanbearpig wrote: »

Why must there be any value in saving, and scraping togather a huge amount of cash for 10 years just to become eligible for a lifetime of debt, just to get a roof over your head?
The only people that benefit are those higher up in the pyramid sche..oh sorry property ladder.

Just rent then, let the LL have all the repairs and stuff to deal with and stop moaning.

All those wishing for a massive drop want one thing, to buy cheap, sit on the asset and MAKE SOME MONEY.

themanbearpig

Kenny4315 wrote: »

Just rent then, let the LL have all the repairs and stuff to deal with and stop moaning.

All those wishing for a massive drop want one thing, to buy cheap, sit on the asset and MAKE SOME MONEY.

I've got to disagree. The majority of people just want a roof over their heads, myself included.
Mortgaging is the only way you can get this with any long term security.
I couldn't care less if the value of my property when I eventually buy stays at the same nominal value for my entire lifetime. If someone extends, or refurbishes a house, fair enough, its value increases. But there is absolutely no reason for a house to increase in value by 20% a year without any improvements.

If the rental sector became more professional, with long term tenancys, and real protection for both the landlord and the tenant, it might actually be possible to create a renting culture. There are just too many cowboy land lords, that have no interest in providing good service, and just see the tenants as cash machines. Hopefully these sorts of LL will be wiped out.

Anything that produces a good returns must involve an element of risk. The risk of an investment in property is now materialising. The reason why it is a problem to society is because its something that shouldnt even have been subject to the risk in the first place!

Dithering_Dad

themanbearpig wrote: »

If the rental sector became more professional, with long term tenancys, and real protection for both the landlord and the tenant, it might actually be possible to create a renting culture. There are just too many cowboy land lords, that have no interest in providing good service, and just see the tenants as cash machines. Hopefully these sorts of LL will be wiped out.

LA housing has been a double edged sword, it has provided affordable rental and secure tenure for its tenants, but has dominated the UK housing market to the point where private enterprise was stifled and marginalised and so there was never any need to follow the US and some EU models with long-term leases, which meant that people had to make a choice between LA housing, insecure private tenancies or buying a home.

This was made worse with the 'right to buy', suddenly a large amount of LA housign stock was taken off the rental market, leaving a void that was filled by the BTL landlords. The main error was in not passing legislation regarding long-term leases for private rentals at the same time as they passed the right to buy legislation.

We're left with a housing situation where there is very little LA housing available and what is available is often low quality and in deprived areas (the best stock in good areas were snapped up years ago), a private rental market where there is no security of tenure and very little legislation to protect the tenant from huge rent hikes, having the property sold from under them, etc. and the option of purchasing their home at a price that results in mortgage payments that represents a huge proportion of their income and will leave most people juggling their finances.

What a mess.

Kenny4315

I'd agree with some of this stuff, I'd be happy to have a long term tenancy for a good tenant. As I said my middle flat is up to 3 years, and the rest of my flats look set.

I have zero time for dodgy LL and have little time for dodgy tenants, I'd love to see these shysters go under myself. I have one next to my place that has been in a trust dispute for some time. I have offered to buy the place and invest heavily but there not interested.

I don't see a house purchase as being a roof over your head, it's your biggest purchase and should be seen as such. To me ever since my first house I have always kept an eye on what I spend against the value of the asset, that way it allows you to move up the ladder to whatever point, or use the wealth later to downsize and enjoy a carefree retirement, or whatever.

All investment vehicle present risk, many to society, stock market crashes effecting pension funds, wars effecting stock markets, etc. Even without BTL as it currently presents itself, HPC have always effected society just look at previous crashes.

Dithering_Dad

Kenny4315 wrote: »

I'd agree with some of this stuff, I'd be happy to have a long term tenancy for a good tenant. As I said my middle flat is up to 3 years, and the rest of my flats look set.

I have zero time for dodgy LL and have little time for dodgy tenants, I'd love to see these shysters go under myself. I have one next to my place that has been in a trust dispute for some time. I have offered to buy the place and invest heavily but there not interested.

I don't see a house purchase as being a roof over your head, it's your biggest purchase and should be seen as such. To me ever since my first house I have always kept an eye on what I spend against the value of the asset, that way it allows you to move up the ladder to whatever point, or use the wealth later to downsize and enjoy a carefree retirement, or whatever.

All investment vehicle present risk, many to society, stock market crashes effecting pension funds, wars effecting stock markets, etc. Even without BTL as it currently presents itself, HPC have always effected society just look at previous crashes.

It's to everyone's benefit (apart from the dodgy landlords and tenants) to have long-term leases that are similar to those in the US, or even similar to the commercial ones we have in the UK. Leases that provide a landlord with a reliable and stable income and that also allow the tenant to view the property as their home and, within limits, tailor the decor to their own taste. This provides a real alternative to having a secure and settled home, other than the LA and home purchase route.

StevieJ

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I meant its gone passed 20% falls by spring.

Were already passed 20% and it's not the end of spring

Mindyou, I guess you could say your not wrong yet, and hope for a few increases!

Just love your predictive powers :rolleyes:

Graham_Devon

StevieJ wrote: »

Just love your predictive powers :rolleyes:

You realise it was talking about you, when I said "your"?

Wasn't me predicting anything!

Your = Yours. Not mine