End to Hips boosts homes for sale

marklv

HIPS were never that big a deal. The biggest outlay you face in buying a house, other than the actual cost of the house, is stamp duty, which currently stands at an extortionate 3% for properties above £250k and less than £500k - i.e. the bulk of the market. This stamp duty cost is an effective 3% you pay on top of the quoted cost of a house.

puddy

will there be a campaign now to get hips refunded for those who had to buy them over the last few years. the government hasnt got the money however to refund the companies who sold the hips. i feel really ripped off because of that hip, not because it was expensive, as someone here said, but its the priciniple of it, they were absolutely pointless. the house we were buying had a hip. however, on the LA searches, the hip researcher couldnt get answers to their queries at the council, so they are legally entitled to say, 'information unavailable'. so when we saw this, we asked for the vendor to do the searches again, they wouldnt, so i ended up doing the searches plus paying for my own hip. what a rip off

thinking about it, wouldnt you have to do your own searches anyway via your own solicitor, in which case, what on earth was the point of the bluddy things??

chucky

Pete111 wrote: »

Re the CGT thing. Am I right in saying that back in early 2007 CGT was 40%?

If so and bearing in mind that buy to let mortgages were as rare as hens teeth from 2008, aren't the number of quick buck seeking BTL landlords who factored 18% CGT into their equations likely to be fairly limited in number?

probably... but don't tell the frothers... they have another 20 pages of pointless posts full of soundbites to go still...

brit1234

Blacklight wrote: »

It's about £350 a month based on two people buying a £100k place.

Hardly fantasy land.

Thats a couple saving £700 a month continously in a cheap area of the country for 3 years They would have to have very good wages in an area where wages are lower. Thats a very hard thing to do when you include rents and the other costs of living such as christmas etc

new_home_owner_3

brit1234 wrote: »

Thats a couple saving £700 a month continously in a cheap area of the country for 3 years They would have to have very good wages in an area where wages are lower. Thats a very hard thing to do when you include rents and the other costs of living such as christmas etc

I know someone who done it they saved over 100,000 pound in 2 years and have just bought their first property over 300,000 pound, complete with paddock and 75 acres of land.

heres this link brit, the person in question is probably out on his boating lake has we speek.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2379403

and heres a link for you

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PP1HEFlkdY

Blacklight

brit1234 wrote: »

Thats a couple saving £700 a month continously in a cheap area of the country for 3 years They would have to have very good wages in an area where wages are lower. Thats a very hard thing to do when you include rents and the other costs of living such as christmas etc

If you're unable to do that then you're hardly in a position to be buying a house.

I really don't understand the 'my boy Jimmy who gets £10 a week for his paper round can't afford to buy the average house' argument. Of course he can't.

brit1234

new_home_owner wrote: »

I know someone who done it they saved over 100,000 pound in 2 years and have just bought their first property over 300,000 pound, complete with paddock and 75 acres of land.

Thats a heck of alot of overtime when my top bosses are cutting back.

Wasn't this person STRing so technically didn't save £100K in two years

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEi7GPkxfsE

kabayiri

Blacklight wrote: »

Yup, all those speculative sellers dipping their toes in to test the water will be falling over themselves to sell at vastly reduced prices. Particularly when they don't have to.

Makes perfect sense.

More houses on the market is a good thing.

More choice means you are more likely to find the right house for you.

Sometimes it comes down to more than pure price.

chucky

kabayiri wrote: »

More houses on the market is a good thing.

More choice means you are more likely to find the right house for you.

Sometimes it comes down to more than pure price.

more houses on the market means that buyers have more choice and don't have to buy the house that the seller won't budge on asking/sale price.

prices should soften (not crash) over the next few months.

but... in this market anything is possible as these people that will be selling will be buying another place and will hold out until they have an offer that will let them buy the house they want to move to. that in itself will prevent prices dropping by huge amounts or it may increase demand... it could quite easily happen.

new_home_owner_3

ive noticed by us the last 2 weeks two houses have come up for sale and they lasted between 1 to 2 weeks before both went sstc.

I think now we might start seeing the better quality homes coming up for sale.