London house prices already exceed 'peak' of 2007

chucky

abaxas wrote: »

So far I've found this.

1) it's based on resale from 1995 onwards. Ie if a home is sold that was bought beofer 1995, it isnt included.
2) all reposession are excluded.
3) commercial property of property bought by a company is not included.
4) all new builds or conversions are excluded.

Anything else we can add?

yes there is

1. London house prices are at 2007 levels

IveSeenTheLight

abaxas wrote: »

Here is a picture of a hamster.

By rules of 'Chucky' I dont have to explain what it means.

Please google the answer.

Not a google answer but is the hamster rolling on the floor laughing at your recent posts in this thread?

Really2

abaxas wrote: »

It's great to see the Bulls having the debating skills of a mute. *

* no offence meant to people who cant speak.

I hate to point it out but mutes can debate.
I dare say Steven Hawkins could debate about space with you if you like but there may only be one winner.

Just because people use other forms of communication does not mean they can not debate.
Sign Language is a perfectly valid language, your failure to understand it would give the mute the edge over you I dare say.

abaxas

My point is simple.

Almost all argument must be backup with facts or it has to be dismissed. The only ones that dont involve 'faith'. Which is a whole new pot of pain.

Also I'm sick to death of people posting things without qualification. I've a scientific brain and would hope that other would enjoy the lifting of arguments from the current 'chavonomics' into the brave new world of fact. Facts rip arguments to bits or build them, everything else is hearsay.

* still cba to grammer/spellung check this.

Really2

abaxas wrote: »

My point is simple.

Almost all argument must be backup with facts or it has to be dismissed. The only ones that dont involve 'faith'. Which is a whole new pot of pain.

Also I'm sick to death of people posting things without qualification. I've a scientific brain and would hope that other would enjoy the lifting of arguments from the current 'chavonomics' into the brave new world of fact. Facts rip arguments to bits or build them, everything else is hearsay.

* still cba to grammer/spellung check this.

I would go with that but would that require some to admit recent gains have actually happened based on factual data.

abaxas

Really2 wrote: »

I would go with that but would that require some to admit recent gains have actually happened based on factual data.

I'm not arguing the data. I'm arguing how the data is made and if it is reliable and respresetative.

My beleif is that house prices are going up, providing you exclude an unknown amount of the data. Which makes the data meaningless apart from to say 'house prices are rising using the LR methodology'. Not that 'house prices are rising'. These are not the same thing, the LR data is flawed by excluding commercially bought or reposessed data.

EDIT : maybe the LR should produce stats including these? Then we would have a better picture. Better still, they could providing all the data so people could work it out themselves. (maybe they do?)

* still cba to spell check

Really2

abaxas wrote: »

I'm not arguing the data. I'm arguing how the data is made and if it is reliable and respresetative.

My beleif is that house prices are going up, providing you exclude an unknown amount of the data. Which makes the data meaningless apart from to say 'house prices are rising using the LR methodology'. Not that 'house prices are rising'. These are not the same thing, the LR data is flawed by excluding commercially bought or reposessed data.



* still cba to spell check

Any data has to have extremes taken out and anomalies. To be honest the LR is fair IMHO. Auctions and cash sales do not represent the average market.

Your average Joe is not a cash rich property investor buying a shell from an auction or a large country estate.
They will be getting a mortgage and buying a house fro them self to live in from an EA. (even though repos sold via EA are listed)
In reality the LR data is fairly spot on for anyone buying a house to live in by conventional means. That will be the vast majority of the population.

abaxas

Really2 wrote: »

Any data has to have extremes taken out and anomalies. To be honest the LR is fair IMHO. Auctions and cash sales do not represent the average market.

Your average Joe is not a cash rich property investor buying a shell from an auction or a large country estate.
They will be getting a mortgage and buying a house fro them self to live in from an EA. (even though repos sold via EA are listed)
In reality the LR data is fairly spot on for anyone buying a house to live in by conventional means. That will be the vast majority of the population.

But then if you discount non 'conventional means' it cant be a 'House price index' as houses/home as sold in other ways.

Maybe we need to know the %ages and prices sold out of the system. Then we can make a judgement call on the accurancy of the index.

Really2

abaxas wrote: »

But then if you discount non 'conventional means' it cant be a 'House price index' as houses/home as sold in other ways.

Maybe we need to know the %ages and prices sold out of the system. Then we can make a judgement call on the accurancy of the index.

It is a house price index for those it is aimed IMHO, that is the general public and for people to know how the general market is preforming.

If the data was excluded on the way up as well on the way down it is fair in my eyes.

Lets face it if you were looking at one area you would know all the repos and could check the auctions.
It would most probably be a small number in reality unless you were looking at a county not a town.

nollag2006

This is a classic distraction.

Rather than agreeing or disagreeing on whether or not prime London house prices above their 2007 peak (which they undeniably are), this bear is trying to query the basis for the data.

So abaxus - A simple question for you ? I doubt I'll get a straight answer, but I'll try.

Do you accept that house prices in prime parts of London are now at or above their 2007 peak?

A simple question