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

nearlynew

How about the people who did actually buy similar flats to these at similar prices. I wonder how much negative equity they are in and stuck?

And would that be worse than these people in the opening article walking away from this 100k down.

Which situation would you prefer to be in?

fc123

Generali wrote: »

As a business-lady you get some pretty decent CGT perks when you come to retire I believe.


It's pretty standard stuff.

I gotta make some serious £££ first though.;)

fc123

abinanthanb wrote: »

Before blaming the buyers we should also consider what kind of tone was followed by the mass media regarding house market when the agreement was signed on..

I am sure that most of them just wanted to buy a HOME, but the choice they made most likely involved the financial benefits of ever rising Housing Market. I agree that they all were stupid to buy a flat for 450K off the plan, but how can all of them be so stupid?

I often see in this forum people blaming the mass media to manipulate the fact and data and portray a different picture from the actual, most of the times supporting booming housing market. We who access forums like this is a small minority and the majority think Mass media is the end of all. I just sampled some frontline papers and web pages during that period, and I couldnt find one pessimistic view on Housing market? Forget about the parties like Promoters/Estate agents or etc (they easily get the tag as "vested interest"), but the journalists who are supposedly a pillar of democracy should have been honest.

Were they and are they?

I really sympathise those people who seem like almost ruined their life, but the root cause for this situation is lying somewhere else.

The root cause is them for the situation as it is now. They signed up (regardless of how they made the decsion) so tough.

Man, we have a society that wants to delete the consequences of any bad decision (as it has hindsight now) and, as Thrugelmir says, if only some contracts hold, but others are voided, where does that leave any future contracts?

I do speak from experience as I have been dealing with a well dodgy lease I signed over 11 years ago. OK, there have been dodgy tricks and underhanded behaviour, but, my paw mark on it, I have to sort it out.

fc123

kennyboy66 wrote: »

There have been significant numbers of public libraries in the UK for 100 years - in fact the Public Library Act was first passed in 1850.

You confuse volume of quantity and quality of information.

mmmm but sometimes you need the quantity to sort out the quality....oh and have the time to wade through the qty to sort the quality.

And then the quality is dependent on opinion da da da...as one persons quality is anothers tosh...and so on.

dopester

kennyboy66 wrote: »

There have been significant numbers of public libraries in the UK for 100 years - in fact the Public Library Act was first passed in 1850.

You confuse volume of quantity and quality of information.

I had in mind ease of accessibility yes - via the internet.

Also mostly how more time has passed for each new generation to learn lessons from history.

In 1850, or 1950... the main generation and the one coming through wouldn't have been able to learn lessons from mistakes made in the dot-com bubble because it had happened yet, although there are many examples of technology-inspired booms to study before it. Or many other manias, or many examples of individual reckless gambles with debt.

Each new generation has had more history to review.

When are we going to get smart? Oh but people didn't know. Friends and family and TV and newspapers, prices forever going up more than we can save, and the boom looked like it would never end. Weep a tear Graham. They were so innocent and so should be cushioned from loss for their decisions. It is like there is nothing in history which could have ever warned them about the dangers. The innocent Kirstie worshippers who just wanted at home, whatever the asking price. No alternatives.. have to buy at any asking price.

LydiaJ

But surely there were other bubbles. South sea bubble, tulip bubble etc, were all before 1950, weren't they?

baileysbattlebus

nearlynew wrote: »

How about the people who did actually buy similar flats to these at similar prices. I wonder how much negative equity they are in and stuck?

And would that be worse than these people in the opening article walking away from this 100k down.

Which situation would you prefer to be in?

It would depend on what profession I was in TBH. I think at least one of them is an accountant who said he would be bankrupted. If that was the case he wouldn't be able to practice, he would probably prefer to be in negative equity than the position he is now in.

Being in danger of losing your livelihood is probably worse than negative equity.

One or two said their careers would be ruined.

But I understand what you are saying.

chewmylegoff

people paid £450k for them because they believed that they would be able to sell them on for £500k before they were even built, i expect.

fc123

baileysbattlebus wrote: »

It would depend on what profession I was in TBH. I think at least one of them is an accountant who said he would be bankrupted. If that was the case he wouldn't be able to practice, he would probably prefer to be in negative equity than the position he is now in.

Being in danger of losing your livelihood is probably worse than negative equity.

One or two said their careers would be ruined.

But I understand what you are saying.

Even more reason for him to have understood all the consequences prior to signing.......I mean...an accountant? He would know more about math than the average person.

Perhaps those old laws about certain careers in BR did have some sense? If you are in such a profession, then taking any risk is unacceptable?
It's why the BR new rules, though easier and more sensible now, didn't get rid of those old fashioned restrictions on ones trade/profession.

wolfplayer

StevieJ wrote: »

The trouble with more information is it also includes more mis and dis information, I think you know what I mean:eek: I am sure it will become increasingly difficult to sift the truth out of the from gunge.

Very true StevieJ.

What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.

Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism.

Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance.

Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumblepuppy.

As Huxley remarked in Brave New World Revisited, the civil libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny "failed to take into account man's almost infinite appetite for distractions."

In 1984, Orwell added, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure.

In short, Orwell feared that what we fear will ruin us. Huxley feared that what we desire will ruin us.