450k for a three bed flat-madness ! Now these people face ruin.

baileysbattlebus

kriss_boy wrote: »

The reality is that thousands of people have made a killing in recent years at the expense of others.

Watch any episode of any property programme and you'll see clueless numpties buying for 200K, spending 50K on it and selling it for 350K. And thats just the ones they caught on camera.

My brother bought his first place for 60K, put a 20K extension on it and sold it 3 years later in early 2008 for 140K.

Its not fair but thats life.

My generation will have to pay their mortgages off the hard way- by repaying them.

Most of my generation (over 50's) will have paid off our mortgages the hard way too.

We started home ownership in a 3 bed terrace (new build in Scotland) in 1982 - we had 3 children by then. Paid £23.5k in 1982 sold in 1986 for £28.5k - didn't exactly make a fortune there. They go for about £135k now - so still affordable.

1986 moved to the south east - paid £55k for a very small 3 bed semi (the mortgage seemed like the national debt) sold in 1987 for £68k. We knew the area then and wanted to move. And £13k for a year was very nice thank you. We thought it was Christmas. It was so different from Scotland where property went up very slowly.

1987 bought a 3 bed detached for £80k sold it in 1993 for £80k. The crash had happened. If you take into account estate agents fees and conveyancing costs we came away from that with less than we put in. But we had enough to put a deposit down on another house. This was the house we would have extended if we had had enough equity and would probably have still been there today. C'est la vie. We were fortunate, friends bought at the peak and paid £136k on a 95% mortgage. They are still in the house BTW.

1993 bought a 5 bed house for £93.5k (it had fallen more than ours had) and the owners were keen to sell - it did need a lot of work. It took us about 6 years to complete the work - we did it as we could afford it. There was no question of us borrowing extra money to tart it up. It got done when it got done. This is the house we still live in - so, sorry to disappoint but we haven't made our fortune from property.

For a lot people my age - this is the 2nd property crash we have had and I can tell you the first one made OH and I very cautious about the whole business, it taught us that you can't take anything for granted. So much so that when my daughter and her partner were looking for a house to buy - we advised them to rent. That was in 2006 - would they listen - no. That was the first time I time I had actually looked at house prices in years - and I was absolutely shocked rigid at how expensive they were where we live.

Graham_Devon

Cleaver wrote: »

Yessssss!!!!!!!!!! In your FACE Devon.

Dunno what your on about, I got more points :T

chewmylegoff

kriss_boy wrote: »

My generation will have to pay their mortgages off the hard way- by repaying them.

because obviously your generation won't inherit houses from their parents, and then sell them to the next generation for even more money.

fc123

chewmylegoff wrote: »

because obviously your generation won't inherit houses from their parents, and then sell them to the next generation for even more money.

I have a feeling that people now mid 40's to mid 50's won't inherit much anyway. Care fees, inheritance taxes bla bla..the 'wealth' now gets filched before it can pass down.

bluey890

fc123 wrote: »

I have a feeling that people now mid 40's to mid 50's won't inherit much anyway. Care fees, inheritance taxes bla bla..the 'wealth' now gets filched before it can pass down.

Not if you have a good accountant or are knowledgable about tax.

fc123

bluey890 wrote: »

Not if you have a good accountant or are knowledgable about tax.

My parents (who are long time divorced) just don't believe in 'all that tax dodging nonsense'' and I quote there.
One could end up leaving 7 figs and has done nothing creative at all about it. Has that ''old fashioned'' view that one should 'put in' whatever the law decrees. Doesn't even spend it now whilst alive.

Deff a generational change with regards taxation. Our generation (well me) see taxes as being too high and disagree on how they are spent a lot of the time so resent paying in any more than we have to.

PasturesNew

There's no inheritance tax in my family. Not enough money to get that far up the wealth scales. Then you divide it by us all ... and I'll probably get about £50-60k at a guess.... now, that's if either one of them doesn't go into a care home. If one of them does and continues to live the normal lifespan for their family then it'd all be wiped out in the fees long before they shuffle off.

So I am expecting nothing. And I have no pension either.

fc123

PasturesNew wrote: »

There's no inheritance tax in my family. Not enough money to get that far up the wealth scales. Then you divide it by us all ... and I'll probably get about £50-60k at a guess.... now, that's if either one of them doesn't go into a care home. If one of them does and continues to live the normal lifespan for their family then it'd all be wiped out in the fees long before they shuffle off.

So I am expecting nothing. And I have no pension either.

Same here......I reckon whatever is there will go on care or private ops if the NHS can't provide and the rest in taxes to the govt in charge at the time.

Mmmmm pensions. For us; Mortgage paid off first then get saving up I guess.

Thrugelmir

baileysbattlebus wrote: »

If you read Pobby's post and the links - it looks as if that's not the case. They signed a contract to say they would buy the property. And it looks as if the developer is holding them to the contract they signed and is willing to take them to court.

I must admit to being a complete numpty when it comes to anything like this - but I would imagine a court would uphold the contract otherwise what would be point in having a contract in the first place.

I think it's caveat emptor here.

Obviously they will lose their deposits. If they were able to purchase these properties at the original cost. Then there's no resaon why they cannot repay Berkeley homes an element of compensation. Even if means taking out a personal loan.

The whole economy would collapse. If people walked away from contracts. Its the fundamental way business is conducted. We are not third world in the UK. In part thats why our financial services sector is so highly regarded. Despite recent events.

LizzieS_2

By signing (or as it appears exchanging) contract, they have probably agreed to lose the deposit if do not continue with purchase, reimburse Berkeley with cost of resale/losses of resale.

For contract terms to be fair, Berkeley would also have to take some risks - for example guarantee a property worth at least 450K at the point of final sale, complete at a set date. Equally both should only sign with knowledge mortgages will be approved - unfair contract terms if Berkeley do not check this out.

Apart from the obvious flaws above, it is impossible to say what is right in this situation without sight of the actual contract.