OH MY GOODNESS - the house price crash hits home!

BACKFRMTHEEDGE

I didn't buy a house in 2007 that was on the market for £500K
I didn't buy a house in 2003 that was on the market for £400k
I didn' buy a house in 1996 that was on the market for £250k.

Whooooo hooo I have saved £1,150k:j:j:j

Clever me;) Now what shall I spend me savings on?

julieq

carolt wrote: »

No, they're not. But better than throwing 35K down the toilet.

And what will you have paid in rent between 2006 and 2011 Carol?

julieq

Harry_Powell wrote: »

But your analysis is also flawed carolt, it relies on specific time periods that suit your argument (i.e. the top of the market in 2007 to the bottom(ish) of the market now. It also factors in the damage to the property that would not have occurred if you had bought the property.

You haven't bought a house yet, so how can you (or anyone, I don't want to personalise this) say that you have 'saved £X by not buying' until you actually buy and then carry out the calculation?

We can crunch the numbers and work it out anyway. I'm quite happy to do that.

Just let me have the offer price on the house, your deposit, the mortgage deal you had, and average monthly rent since you didn't buy.

Also let me know if you planned to trash the house. That is a fairly important part of the underlying assumptions.

julieq

And... Carol, I dealt with your specific case earlier. I was taking a more general case in answer to someone else in the post you quoted.

But I'm curious to understand where you think I said HPI moved in a uniform straight line. That's not part of my argument at all. I am saying there is a probability of capital growth over the 25 years of a mortgage, not that it is straight line year to year (anyway it'd be exponential because it's compounded, but never mind that).

As for real world cases, how is it "real world" to contrast prices for untrashed houses with trashed houses and then claim a general conclusion from that?

wintersunshine

silvercar wrote: »

I've found the link (I knew where to look, carolt looking not that far away from me).

The house is cash buyers only because the kitchen has been totally ripped out, even the kitchen sink!. You would never get a mortgage on a property with no kitchen.

Even if carolt wanted it, there would be considerable costs in refitting, new kitchen, electrics, carpets, fireplace... plus a cash buyer means obtaining a mortgage would be impossible.

I would expect this price reduction given its current state and unmortgageability, irrespective of any HPC.

PS similar properties in decent condition are on at 10-15% more than this ones' price in 2006, not that they will necessarily achieve that, just a point of reference.

So it's yet another piece of bogus evidence of house price drops from CarolT. Why did she not mention the other properties which have increased in price in her op?

If she had bought this house in 2007 she probably would have increased her capital, saved her self a pile of rent and been 3 years into a mortgage.

Priceless.

silvercar

Yoshua wrote: »

Whats your predictions for next year and the year after Carlot and silvercar?

Do you think this house will be 50% down from the top in a few years?

This house is a problem, because it needs a cash buyer. If it was mortgeable I think it would have probably fetched slightly more than it sold for in 2007.

That area will be allright, nice village, good road links - downside is no secondary school and very limited public transport. The lack of public transport means it is priced cheaper than neighbouring areas and so prices are quite stable. There is a real village feel there so older properties in the village do well, there is also a modern private estate with a variety of house sizes which is popular. Green belt borders & commuter land is a good mix. (comuting distance of London, fast rail links nearby). Noticeably a lot of cars in that area, due to lack of public transport.

I think prices have only dropped 10-20% since the top and are already picking up again. The low point seems to be late 2007.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

silvercar wrote: »

If it was mortgeable I think it would have probably fetched slightly more than it sold for in 2007.
.

Oh dear.....

Very lucky escape indeed for carolt then.

She was in real danger of making a profit there, instead of wasting 3 years of rent.

Making money from housing. That'd never do.....

silvercar

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Oh dear.....

Very lucky escape indeed for carolt then.

She was in real danger of making a profit there, instead of wasting 3 years of rent.

Making money from housing. That'd never do.....

But schooling has become an issue for carolt, so it isn't all about money.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

silvercar wrote: »

But schooling has become an issue for carolt, so it isn't all about money.

Then she should just admit that she has lost money by renting instead of buying, but state she feels it is worth it.

Rather than trying to con herself and others into thinking such a move made sense financially. When it clearly doesn't.

Thanks for the info silvercar, at least now we know why carol won't tell us what area she is in. Prices back to 2007 levels, so impossible to gain versus renting since then. (even if peak locally was 2008)

I just wonder why she keeps on insisting that "her crash is still happening", when we all know the south east is recovering faster than almost anywhere else. Sure, prices may still be down from peak, for now, but they are also up significantly from trough.

We know prices are rising strongly in the South East as well, yet she keeps on denying it and refusing to identify where she is. Sorry, but it just makes these tales all the more bizarre.

Harry_Powell

Why does it bother you so much?