We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide

Are we over priced??

124

Comments

  • dopester
    dopester Posts: 4,890 Forumite
    SelbyJay wrote: »
    That's a good question. But then who can really trust the banks considering the damage their decisions have made to our economy? Banks hardly deal with those with 5% or 10% deposits, does that mean that those with low deposits should be excluded from the property game also?

    Anyone who calls it a 'game' should be excluded imo.

    Many speculators, on the back of easy credit and ever higher borrowing thought it was a 'game' you could only win at. With their 'wisdom' that house prices 'double every 7 years.'

    Wanting a home at a prices which doesn't leave you as a complete debt-slave is not a game. The speculators and the BTLers are more likely to consider it a game, but many will learn it's a game you can be bankrupted with.

    I find it amusing the OP sings the praises of SO and schemes where you have to be an FTB. It is to be fully expected, given that it's vital they find a borrower/buyer from this narrow segment of the market for the property. Also any 'equity' is not yet quantifiable until the place is sold. I don't have anything to post about the property or the area - as I don't know it.
  • sammyjammy
    sammyjammy Posts: 8,139 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    That's because you're only buying half the property

    And its in Selby
    "You've been reading SOS when it's just your clock reading 5:05 "
  • poppy10_2
    poppy10_2 Posts: 6,597 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    brit1234 wrote: »
    Keep us updated on the sale news
    She's dropped the price another three grand, from £56,495 to £53,500. That 'equity' is melting away fast....

    http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-28778990.html
    poppy10
  • GDB2222
    GDB2222 Posts: 26,879 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    I see the photis have been changed. Why no photos of the view from the balcony? Surely that's a big selling point?
    No reliance should be placed on the above! Absolutely none, do you hear?
  • Blacksheep1979
    Blacksheep1979 Posts: 4,224 Forumite
    1,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    poppy10 wrote: »
    She's dropped the price another three grand, from £56,495 to £53,500. That 'equity' is melting away fast....

    http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-28778990.html

    Couldn't be anything to do with the property being overpriced when bought and buyers are now cottoning on to the fact that SO is a scam?
  • Cannon_Fodder
    Cannon_Fodder Posts: 3,980 Forumite
    Eric1 wrote: »
    Especially now, when the probability of 5-10% falls is very real.
    Really? How do you suggest that will happen? Rates will remain low for a good few years yet, the mortgage support scheme to help struggling owners has been extended once more, and it would be political suicide to remove it. Forced sellers are also rare due to government pressure on banks.


    Really? How do you know that ? Your statement is just as much a guess as Eric's.

    As for repossessions, ok they have yet to hit the peak of the 90s crash, that doesn't mean they are rare.

    UK home repossessions hit 14-year high
    http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/construction_and_property/article7022929.ece


    And the millions pumped into various support schemes will not be available indefinitely (in my opinion, just a guess, like most of what you have written).

    Political suicide, would be not dealing with the debt before the following election, so pain in the first two years is on the cards.

    Unless you think debt interest payments the size of the entire Defence budget is sustainable.
  • poppy10_2
    poppy10_2 Posts: 6,597 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    C'mon guys, save the house price crash posts for the Debate forum.
    poppy10
  • dopester
    dopester Posts: 4,890 Forumite
    SelbyJay wrote: »
    If my property is currently over valued, i believe it's because A) i've mistakenly put trust in EAs or B) because of the wider troubles in the housing market. Not because it's part of a SO scheme.

    I don't think we are going to convince the OP of the perils of Shared Ownership. Markets themselves are the best educators, even if some people manage to wriggle out of being impacted before the education is complete.

    And markets eventually overcome all warped attempts to buck them, with attempts to keep asset prices inflated or propped up, whether it be with QE and 500 year low interest rates.

    Those trying to buck markets begin to find their attempts to stop correction of their pumped up crazy high valuations which have little validity against economic conditions, leads to the creation of ever more new overwhelming problems coming in at them from all directions. Until they have no choice but to surrender their delusions and accept the reality. Else suffer even worse problems.

    http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-28778990.html?premiumA=true
    01 July 2010 10:16:40
    * Price changed: from '£53,500' to 'Offers in Excess of £49,950'

    I've got incredible difficulty in seeing how a 2 bed flat like this, is worth £50K for a 50% share, when you can buy 100% of fairly good comparable 2 bed houses from £80K within a 1/4 mile radius of the flat. And I think those houses are also very exposed to further value correction.

    1) http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-25041931.html
    2) http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-26551198.html
    3) http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-27421799.html
  • Idiophreak
    Idiophreak Posts: 12,024 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    dopester wrote: »
    I've got incredible difficulty in seeing how a 2 bed flat like this, is worth £50K for a 50% share, when you can buy 100% of fairly good comparable 2 bed houses from £80K within a 1/4 mile radius of the flat. And I think those houses are also very exposed to further value correction.

    Bear in mind that there's intrinsic value in 50% of the property being cheaper - more people will be able to afford a 50% share in the place, ie there's more demand, so the price for 50% of the property should naturally be more than 50% of the cost of 100% of the property. Probably not 25% more, as in your example, but you can't forget about it altogether.
  • brit1234
    brit1234 Posts: 5,385 Forumite
    Idiophreak wrote: »
    Bear in mind that there's intrinsic value in 50% of the property being cheaper - more people will be able to afford a 50% share in the place, ie there's more demand, so the price for 50% of the property should naturally be more than 50% of the cost of 100% of the property. Probably not 25% more, as in your example, but you can't forget about it altogether.


    Really?

    Sorry but I disagree. The bad points of shared ownership are well known especially all the extra costs and the higher rate they increase. they milk the owners money very effective and very off putting for a buyer.
    :exclamatiScams - Shared Equity, Shared Ownership, Newbuy, Firstbuy and Help to Buy.

    Save our Savers
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 354.1K Banking & Borrowing
  • 254.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 455.3K Spending & Discounts
  • 247.1K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 603.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 178.3K Life & Family
  • 261.2K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.