Housing Affordability has peaked, now decreasing

chucky

Spartacus_Mills wrote: »

You're wrong.

According to Hamish affordability is very good and virtually at an all time low. Therefore it must be true.

i'm sure that Captain MacTavish said...

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Housing still much more affordable than at peak, and indeed still much more affordable than the long term average

and...

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

But at the trough affordability was at a point not seen since the mid 90's, and affordability has now peaked, and is decreasing.

that's not Hamish saying it's very good or at an all time low.... come on Mr Mills behave yourself...

but at least The Following User Says Thank You to Spartacus_Mills For This Useful Post: Show me >>
rewired (Today) :rotfl:

sss555s

The_White_Horse wrote: »

you can say what you like about this prediction or that prediction.

the simple truth is, houses are UNAFFORDABLE. in and around London you are looking at 200k plus for a bog standard terraced house. the repayments, even at these very low interest rates are over 1000 a month (at say 4%). For most people, over 1000 a month is not really affordable. it is probably 60% plus of their disposable income. When you then factor in bills and council tax the average person will have next to nothing to actually spend in the greater economy.

And in and around London 200k will get you a real dive. To live in what I call a decent family home, you are looking at 350k.

they are NOT AFFORDABLE. and no chart, graph or statistics will change that fact.

Inflation is going to have more to do with houses becoming affordable than price drops.

Nothing will change much until the Tory's get in.

If you really want to know what is going to happen start reading from December 1978 onwards and though some large assets were sold off we have also just put a lot of commitment into new assets too and the labyrinth has the same end zone.

ess0two

The_White_Horse wrote: »

you can say what you like about this prediction or that prediction.

the simple truth is, houses are UNAFFORDABLE. in and around London you are looking at 200k plus for a bog standard terraced house. the repayments, even at these very low interest rates are over 1000 a month (at say 4%). For most people, over 1000 a month is not really affordable. it is probably 60% plus of their disposable income. When you then factor in bills and council tax the average person will have next to nothing to actually spend in the greater economy.

And in and around London 200k will get you a real dive. To live in what I call a decent family home, you are looking at 350k.

they are NOT AFFORDABLE. and no chart, graph or statistics will change that fact.

Fair point,but the housing market dont just revolve around London and the South East.

ukcarper

The_White_Horse wrote: »

you can say what you like about this prediction or that prediction.

the simple truth is, houses are UNAFFORDABLE. in and around London you are looking at 200k plus for a bog standard terraced house. the repayments, even at these very low interest rates are over 1000 a month (at say 4%). For most people, over 1000 a month is not really affordable. it is probably 60% plus of their disposable income. When you then factor in bills and council tax the average person will have next to nothing to actually spend in the greater economy.

And in and around London 200k will get you a real dive. To live in what I call a decent family home, you are looking at 350k.

they are NOT AFFORDABLE. and no chart, graph or statistics will change that fact.

Trouble is it's at least £800 to rent one

Spartacus_Mills

breadlinebetty wrote: »

Another sour puss I see!:D Sorry this has spoilt your Christmas!

Why would your lack of comprehension spoil my Xmas ? Especially as Xmas was 2 days ago.

Emy1501

chucky wrote: »

you're right Hamish affordability is at it's best - but for how long?
do you think that a reduction in disposable income will help FTB's?
those with property will probably be fine - those that want to get into property will find it even harder, not that it will affect house prices mind you. only those like Davesaveve who took the 'risk' will be the ones who will know they have done well.

come on Emy - not even debating the facts but yet another attack on Hamish.

what this man said Emy >>>>

I have debated the facts? Hamish says you have to be mad or what ever he said to be delaying buying. Clearly not true for everyone unless Hamish knows whats going on in every part of the country. Also you know I dont do prediction especially when the author has been wrong for the last few years and neither does Hamish as he keeps telling us. So why is he taking these people seriously.

As for spoiling Christmas no Chrsitmas has been and gone. To be honest I am more worried by Terry Smith on the Jeff Randell show who's prediction for this year was a gilt strike. Also Philip green could not see retail figures any better and the chief exec of the trinity mirror group agreeing with all three that even the Conseratives suggested cuts to get the debt down were not going far enough. Most worrying though was Terry Smiths comments that Interest only mortgage holders especially those who Mew'd were dead but they just did not know it yet!

The_White_Horse

ess0two wrote: »

Fair point,but the housing market dont just revolve around London and the South East.

of course it does.

rumbaba

carolt wrote: »

I thought the article in the OP was interesting, too.

Hardly a surprise.

As a would-be FTB, it's clearly a bad time to buy, and about to get worse. As all those desperate to sell find there are no buyers, prices will fall to comfortable levels again.

Best not to be in a hurry.

You're talking rubbish. There's actually a lack of property on the market, and too many buyers chasing the same one.

Just shows how little you know!

rumbaba

Rob_Marx wrote: »

from your posts i gather 'affordable' means that joe 'supermarket cashier' bloggs can get a mortgage with no deposit on a cheap deal for 2 years before becoming financially crippled for life, whereas 'unaffordable' means joe won't be accepted for a life ruining debt but billy '20% deposit' bunter will be able to get a reasonable deal without owing a huge amount of capital

Yes, you're right. I think you'll find tghat throughout time ALL lowly paid staff have had to rent, or been housed by the council or local housing association.

Supermarket cashiers have never been able to afford a mortgage - ever. It isn't a God-given that all and sundry are entitled to buy a house of their own you know! This isn't Utopia.

You have the 'have's' and you have the 'have nots' - that may seem unfair - but it's the way of the world. If people aren't born into money, or inherit it, then the only way for them to make a success of their lives is to study and work hard so they can earn a decent salary to enable them to buy their own home. After all, that's what most Englishmen aspire to - owning their own home. Beinf king of the castle and all that.

It is sad that low-paid people can't afford a mortgage, although even they could possibly get a small one with interest rates as low as they are now (they could always go on to a fixed rate). But it's also sad that some people live in tin huts with no running water in countries all around the world. Should we all stop treating ourselves on account of their hardship? Cos that's what you're implying.

It's not my fault that the supermarket cashier chose that profession!

markharding557

we should not under estimate the effects of everyone having less money after next may when the elected government (irrespective of its makeup)hangs us upside down for every last penny to pay the national debt.
interest rates?no elections to worry about so if they want to raise it they will