Halifax +2.6 % MoM

chucky

lostinrates wrote: »

Fewer costs:p (I know glass houses and stones)

.hmm. I don't know.

If renters include those who can't afford to buy, doesn't that drag down an average? meaning they don't hav same disposable income?

Also, although renting some argue costs less monthly, I'm not sure it always does.

historically no because the number of FTB's has always increased and the volume of private rented accommodation has never had dramatic increases except for late 2006 and 2007.

here's a snapshot from Scotland, the rest of the UK is quite similar - the demand for property has always been there. owner occupied property has increased but the number of privately rented properties has stayed the same so the demand is always there and prices would be maintained.

mewbie_2

Is that a picket fence?

lostinrates

chucky wrote: »

. owner occupied property has increased but the number of privately rented properties has stayed the same so the demand is always there and prices would be maintained.

Ok, how are the prices maintained? How are people we will assume can't afford to get on the property ladder paying rent? (something more thn wage inflation supporting higher rents, or not?)

I agree with you, Chucky, and I like having reasonble discussion about it, I just think something doesn't add up right..:o I'm trying to get to the root of what that is.

mewbie_2

lostinrates wrote: »

I'm trying to get to the root of what that is.

Chucky, please go easy on her.

chucky

lostinrates wrote: »

Ok, how are the prices maintained? How are people we will assume can't afford to get on the property ladder paying rent? (something more thn wage inflation supporting higher rents, or not?)

I agree with you, Chucky, and I like having reasonble discussion about it, I just think something doesn't add up right..:o I'm trying to get to the root of what that is.

i guess it's driven by social economic factors too - living a commutable distance to work, living close to friends, living in nice areas. you pay that little bit extra to live in a nicer place.

those that cannot afford to buy; wait for an economic downturn, save up until they're in a position to buy (maybe not in there desired location) or don't buy at all and rent.

everything is adjusted to living within your means and that includes location - it's like living in a nice house in a bad area or living in bad house in a nice area. you choose what's in your budget.

lostinrates

chucky wrote: »

or don't buy at all and rent. everything is adjusted to living within your means and that includes location - it's like living in a nice house in a bad area or living in bad house in a nice area.

yes, yes, yes. BUT if they cnnot afford to buy, and rents are going up to support the yield tht mkes it worthwhile for investors to buy to let, rents are going up.

I'm not being clear:o, because \I'm not getting the answer.

mewbie_2

lostinrates wrote: »

yes, yes, yes. ...

I'm not being clear:o, because \I'm not getting the answer.

Actually, LIR perhaps you should go easy on Chucky...

I'm outtahere.

IveSeenTheLight

nearlynew wrote: »

Why?

Would it not back up your argument?

Because you guys, dont accept the fact that house prices are mean average, therefore you want to see the median wage instead of a like for like mean average wage

I explained it here
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=22083527&postcount=54

but to save you opening the link, here it is for this thread

You think that house prices should be valued on average at £90k, well according to the National statistics, the male full time employee mean average was £35,122, the female mean average is £25,304, together that makes a mean joint income of £60,426.

Why use mean? Because average house prices are mean, not median.

Now I accept that its not ideal for families if both parents are working, however another poster on here mentioned a 1 1/2 household income family.

In that case the average part time female mean average is £9,911, therefore the mean household income of 1 full time male and 1 part time female is £45,033

So for house prices to be £90k on average, you are looking for a 2 x household income

It's therefore easy to associate that with a mortgage multiple of 3.5 x, the amount of mortgage attainable should be £157,615, not including any deposit put down.

If you want to use a 3 x multiplier, then mortgage availability would be £135,099. Add on a 10% deposit and house prices on a mean average should be £148,609.

I think this is why we are seeing a stabalising of house prices at the moment as the mean average person / family out there is starting to find it affordable

**NOTE** I am not trying to be sexist by posting male full time and female part time averages. It's my opinion that the majority (but not all) of parents who choose to stay at home with children will be female.

chucky

lostinrates wrote: »

yes, yes, yes. BUT if they cnnot afford to buy, and rents are going up to support the yield tht mkes it worthwhile for investors to buy to let, rents are going up.

I'm not being clear:o, because \I'm not getting the answer.

i guess they'd have to move into social housing but to be fair i don't think that it's that bad for that many people who are working that you can't afford to pay rent.

you'd move into something more suitable to your budget and your last resort would be to house share or even move in with parents.

lostinrates

chucky wrote: »

i guess they'd have to move into social housing but to be fair i don't think that it's that bad for that many people who are working that you can't afford to pay rent.

you'd move into something more suitable to your budget and your last resort would be to house share or even move in with parents.

We're getting closer, but we're still not hitting the answer to my question.

I'm not trying to be difficult, I'm trying to be coherant.

Social housing is part of the answer I think.