London house prices still crazy!

drc

tuggy wrote: »

just seemed a bit harsh to imply they sit 5 hours a day, feet up then collect a 100k plus pay cheque

Well, a lot of mp's seem to earn much more than that for doing very little and don't let me get started on all the non-jobs in the public sector and the handsome pay and pension package that rewards inefficent heads of so many local councils:rolleyes:

lostinrates

SGE1 wrote: »

Moving to the home counties isn't always a real alternative though. Londoners don't necessarily live in the capital because it's close to work - many people enjoy living in the city. The garden of England is all very well, and no doubt cheaper, but it doesn't really compare to London does it, if your reasoning for living there in the first place isn't just 'it's near my work'.
.

we don't really cre about living in a city, but DH employers have a un unofficial M25 zone rule ...made more enforcable by working hours and the need to get taxis home late at night often. If you work really long hours then commuterville can be a PITA and and significant time to an already long day. Commuter belt is certainly wider than it was in time gone by.

setmefree2

GracieP wrote: »

The fact is that they are falling, but they still have quite a lot further to fall.

I think you'll find that the Land Registry figures for March were up 0.6%...

"In London, prices actually rose by 0.6%, the first monthly rise since March 2008. The North-East, South-West and Wales also rose on the month. Meanwhile Yorkshire, the East, and the West Midlands were hardest hit, falling up to 2%."


http://www1.landregistry.gov.uk/asse...eng-300409.pd

setmefree2

drc wrote: »

Anyone would think this is Beverley Hills or something :rolleyes:.

Just for the record this is what homes in Beverley Hills cost:rotfl:

http://www.luxuryhomesnetwork.com/beverly_hills_real_estate_homes/

ad44downey

setmefree2 wrote: »

I think you'll find that the Land Registry figures for March were up 0.6%...

"In London, prices actually rose by 0.6%, the first monthly rise since March 2008. The North-East, South-West and Wales also rose on the month. Meanwhile Yorkshire, the East, and the West Midlands were hardest hit, falling up to 2%."


http://www1.landregistry.gov.uk/asse...eng-300409.pd

If you look at that document you will see that prices only rose in 5 London Boroughs and fell in 26 boroughs so that suggests otherwise.

Wookster

ukcarper wrote: »

Prices in London have and will always be high that’s why so many people commute.

Perhaps higher than the national average however those prices have been driven by city wages & bonuses. We all know what's happening to those right now, and to a great many people employed in that sector: not good things.

London prices have a long way down to go.

ukcarper wrote: »

Even in places like Cobham Surrey you can get 3 bed houses for 300k.

That's where all the football players live

beingjdc

crazygaijin wrote: »

In some areas of N London prices havent really fallen much yet.

In others, they've collapsed.

This block sold en masse for between £200k and £250k new-build in 2004 (i.e. before the most recent outbreak of crazy). Now can't shift them at under £150k.

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-20925040.html

Upgrade to 2-bed 2-bath for just £10k extra.

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-21279280.html

Fire_Fox

SGE1 wrote: »

Moving to the home counties isn't always a real alternative though. Londoners don't necessarily live in the capital because it's close to work - many people enjoy living in the city. The garden of England is all very well, and no doubt cheaper, but it doesn't really compare to London does it, if your reasoning for living there in the first place isn't just 'it's near my work'.

It is a viable alternative, it just may not be an alternative that is attractive to you. If you want the London lifestyle you will always have to pay a premium because several million people feel exactly the same way. If you want city living without paying London prices then relocate to Brum, Manchester, Leeds, Newcastle or Liverpool. Or buy a quality upper floor flat in one of the capital's cheaper boroughs.

dopester

amcluesent wrote: »

Interesting. My employer looks likely to be moving in 2011 and a train into Victoria would make sense.

Longfield to Victoria. Time on train = 40 to 45 minutes, 80 to 90 minutes to work and back.

£17.60 return. 5 days = £88 per week. Maybe cheaper if you can sort out a season rail ticket.

Moving up North? Best choose a place which isn't just near your precious employer, but where other employment and trade opportunities will continue to exist. The full consequences of the credit-crunch will unfold over a number of years.

drc

setmefree2 wrote: »

Just for the record this is what homes in Beverley Hills cost:rotfl:

http://www.luxuryhomesnetwork.com/beverly_hills_real_estate_homes/

There are average terrace houses in the area I live which have sold (at 2007 prices) for £1.5 million. There are houses still on the market for that price (albeit not selling). The houses in Beverley Hills are huge, in a very desirable area full of wealthy and famous people. They have things like swimming pools etc. The houses in this area are no doubt beautiful but nothing like the size of those houses, the area is not full of famous rich celebrities (unless you count Robert Peston and Eastenders actors), we do not have year round sunshine or tourist attractions. I just don't understand why 3 or 4 bed terrace houses in suburban London are valued at the same price as huge mansions in Beverley Hills? I think a lot of people around here have delusions of grandeur or just want to become millioinaires the easy way :rolleyes: