Halifax +1.1% (YoY -12.1%)

lemonjelly

StevieJ wrote: »

You said previously that marginal forced sales (death,divorce etc) in a low volume market would collapse values, doesn't seem to be happening.

Doesn't seem to be happening though.

Marriage rates are at an all time low, hence it is more seperating than divorcing.

On a bereavement, I suspect surviving relatives are renting properties out. This means they hold on to them (if sentimentally attached), can move back into them (& rent out where they live), or are looking at the price falls/recovery & are thinking they'll get an extra £20k if they wait 6 months to sell.

the_ash_and_the_oak

StevieJ wrote: »

You said previously that marginal forced sales (death,divorce etc) in a low volume market would collapse values, doesn't seem to be happening.

that was my main point of disagreement w dopester also

dopester

StevieJ wrote: »

You said previously that marginal forced sales (death,divorce etc) in a low volume market would collapse values, doesn't seem to be happening.

It happened in 2008 did it not. Transaction levels plummeted and house prices too, due in part to the restriction of credit. The credit crunch is not magically over. You can not expect banks owned by shareholders to loan money to poor risks. If state supported banks lend freely to poor risks, then why would private shareholder ever want to own any of that business.

As it happens I know a guy who recently celebrated their 30th birthday who is going through a divorce right now. Traded up in the boom, and bought very near the peak. Had a cushion but now in NE. Quite well paid though (£50K ish), on low SVR. No pressure as can make repayments easily with lots of money left-over for spending.

I question whether they will be able to keep their job as so many in that sector are at risk. In fact the whole company is at risk of going under with it's weight of debt and drop-off in work.

Trying to keep this bubble inflated is having hidden reaction in the wider economy. It isn't for every BoE and Labour bubble-protecting action there is a solely a positive reaction only.

Renewed concern about the effectiveness of the Bank of England's quantitative easing policy surfaced on Wednesday after the release of data showing consumer borrowing is down to its lowest level for 15 years.

New consumer credit and mortgage lending were well below forecast levels with the result that the £414m increase in net lending was the weakest since the Bank of England started collecting the data in 1993. Unsecured consumer credit fell to £71m, well below the predicted £300m while a modest improvement in net new mortgage lending - up from £331m to £343m over the last two months - was well short of the £600m pencilled in by economists.

Mortgage approvals ran ahead of expectations, rising from 44,169 to 47,584 - the highest for 15 months. Bridget O'Leary, senior economist at the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, said that activity was still weak despite the welcome improvement. Net lending for purchases remained 50pc below the long run average while house deals were still falling through because of a lack of finance.

Money supply figures added to the nervousness. The headline M4 money supply dropped 0.2pc last month, the biggest fall for almost five years.

Telegraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/5933525/Lending-data-raises-quantative-easing-fears.html

StevieJ

dopester wrote: »

It happened in 2008 did it not. Transaction levels plummeted and house prices too, due in part to the restriction of credit. l

But your suggestion (if I have it correct) was that the marginal forced sales would be heavily discounted and set a marker for the area and drag all the other similar properties down. The 2008 falls were simply a reaction to a credit famine and the consequent increase in deposit requirements, nothing to do with forced sales. In fact transaction levels are still low in 2009 but house prices have increased (NW) or flattened on the other indices at a time when the effects of forced sales would be really starting to bite. BTW I understood the logic of your argument I just thought that there was to much govt support that would mitigate the very worst of forced sales i.e. repos sent to auction.

dopester

StevieJ wrote: »

But your suggestion (if I have it correct) was that the marginal forced sales would be heavily discounted and set a marker for the area and drag all the other similar properties down.

Well I'm glad you understand the logic of my argument for value. That those who are doing the buying and the selling effect the value for all property, including for owners who don't have their houses on the market.... even if it's a general process with value change effect not occurring instantly or uniformly.

Do you really believe the 'credit-famine' is over?

How long can they maintain that support though? Mortgage rescue schemes, paying interest for debtors, stopping repossessions, bailing out failing companies. Good money following bad for me.

Atlas would be sweating with the amount of debt they've taken on, and he'd need to grow another pair of arms and hands to juggle all of the problems that will continue to be added from the attempt to rescue bad debts and return to old ways.

Low interest rates for those with mortgages isn't a bad thing if the principal is being repaid. Banks will happily settle for that at the moment. When the numbers climb who lose their jobs and can't make even micro SVR repayments, what happens then? That is the way I believe we are heading, even if it may be a slow path. Further government support? Forced to sell at market values? Write-off the debt in some areas for fear of social breakdown and further economic decline?

What about that guy in London with the 18 or 24 luxury properties he is trying to unload? Will he get his price? Will he be forced to accept less? What is the position of his lenders? Hold out? Rent them? Wait for recovery? Accept what the market will pay? He alone, behind on his debts, with property at the top-end, could influence one month's LR/Halifax/Nationwide figures maybe, if forced to sell for what the market will pay.

The boys learned metalwork, the girls pottery.

'But we're not peasants, or... or...'Artisans,' Elethiomel provided.

'You will not argue, and you shall learn something of what it is to work with materials,' Cheradenine's father told the two boys.

'But it's common!'

'So is learning how to write, and to work with numbers. Proficiency in those skills will not make you clerks any more than working with iron will make you blacksmiths.'

'But...'

'You will do as you are told. If it is more in accord with the martial ambitions you both lay claim to, you may attempt to construct blades and armour in the course of your lessons.

The boys looked at each other.

'You might also care to tell your language tutor that I instructed you to ask him whether it is acceptable for young men of breeding to begin a sentence with the unfortunate word, "But". That is all.'

'Thank you, sir.'

'Thank you, sir.'

-Use Of Weapons.

StevieJ

dopester wrote: »

Low interest rates for those with mortgages isn't a bad thing if the principal is being repaid. Banks will happily settle for that at the moment. When the numbers climb who lose their jobs and can't make even micro SVR repayments, what happens then? .

I thought the govt coughed up, I am sure also that banks would be happy as a compromise that the interest was being paid.
BTW I am not a man of breeding, in that context anyway I wonder what he would have made of starting a sentence with BTW.

Thrugelmir

StevieJ wrote: »

I thought the govt coughed up, I am sure also that banks would be happy as a compromise that the interest was being paid.
BTW I am not a man of breeding, in that context anyway I wonder what he would have made of starting a sentence with BTW.

The interest is being rolled up for up to 2 years for many.