Are we already in a new major nonswing?

Wheezy_2

doire wrote: »

Will you spout the same reply (only in terms of rises) when Hmaish comes a calling with his aberdeen figures?

I'm not really that interested in Aberdeen prices.

IveSeenTheLight

Dirk_Rambo wrote: »

no, neither of those two areas as it happens. and thanks for your considerable interest in my whereabouts. I don't want to be too specific as to where I live as you do get a lot of weirdos and stalkers on the internet.
but if really2 can tell me where RDB lives then i will be able to confirm yes or no whether he lives anywhere near me

strange, carolt says almost exactly the same thing.

House prices are down in my ares, dont want to disclose my whereabouts, there are lots of stalkers on the net

Henry_P_Chester

chucky wrote: »

actually you need to get your facts right - the price drops happened in the first 18 months. prices stagnated and didn't return to peak prices for about another 4 years.

a bit of what's happening now... except that with the possibility of inflation it makes it harder for those buying and easier for those that own property...

deflation would be more interesting.

Your wrong there chucky. 9 years to return to peak.

1989. £62,794
1998. £62,983

source: http://www.nationwide.co.uk/hpi/downloads/UK_house_price_since_1952.xls

chucky

Henry_P_Chester wrote: »

Your wrong there chucky. 9 years to return to peak.

1989. £62,794
1998. £62,983

source: http://www.nationwide.co.uk/hpi/downloads/UK_house_price_since_1952.xls

fair point and very true. i stand corrected.

the main point i was trying to get across is that the price falls happened for 12-24 months and then increased upwards until they returned to peak.

tomterm8

Harry_Powell wrote: »

The debate in here will become as stagnant as the housing market.
.

Saying that was a bit redundant, really, have you been reading the forum recently?

Thrugelmir

Loopgames wrote: »

It does feel like it's all precarious - could go either way.

The question is - is the government trying to keep it together as long as possible until the major debt threat goes away or are the markets genuinely stabilising under the natural economics of things (i.e. supply and demand)

I get the impression that all this calm is artificial and the storm is brewing under it all...the longer the government keeps a lid on it the stronger the collapse. But that's my bear personality coming through.

The problem is many people haven't been directly affected by the recession yet. Its all been too easy aride. The budget may well give a truer indication of the real cost of the financial crisis and global recession.

The events in the Eurozone have taken the focus away from the UK. Where the positive sounds from the new Government seem to have been well received by the markets. Providing the words are followed up by real action. Then maybe the UK can quietly get on with rebuilding the economy. Many people I have spoken to are happy just to have paid work, no complaints about being underpaid.

wintersunshine

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

strange, carolt says almost exactly the same thing.

House prices are down in my ares, dont want to disclose my whereabouts, there are lots of stalkers on the net

Well spotted

carolt

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

strange, carolt says almost exactly the same thing.

House prices are down in my ares, dont want to disclose my whereabouts, there are lots of stalkers on the net

Do you really think I'd choose a user-name like Dirk Rambo???!!! :eek:

'Nuff said.

carolt

Harry_Powell wrote: »

Title says it all really. I've seen arguments from both rival gangs on here (the 'bears' and the 'bulls') and all of their data, debate and argument has only served to convince me that we will have a protracted period of stagnation in the housing market. We will have some months with gains, which will send the 'bulls' into raptures and the 'bears' into retreat and some months of drops, which will have the opposite effect. The debate in here will become as stagnant as the housing market.

The question for prospective buyers is when to buy. Those waiting for large drops will be dissapointed and will need to look for other financial triggers for their house purchases. I would advise comparing things like rent vs mortgage, quality of live as a tenant vs owner occupier, payback of overpayment of mortgage vs increasing deposit, etc. This isn't an exhaustive list by any means, and I'd be interested to see what other financial triggers people have.

No financial triggers - personal life ones actually matter more. As long as I can afford it, the direction of house prices doesn't really bother me too much; I'd go for a long-term fix, so it wouldn't really matter, and only buy somewhere big enough to be a long-term home.

Obviously, if I can't afford it, I can't afford it - then any other 'triggers' are a bit irrelevant as I wouldn't be in a position to afford it.

Which is why, as soon as we could afford it, we looked for somewhere to buy; hard when you live in a small village and few suitable properties come up.

We stopped looking in late 2006/early 2007 when a property we had offered on and had agreed fell though, as everything else out there was then unaffordable - despite the dips in prices taking us back to 2006 in my area (or earlier in some cases), we were no longer looking to buy for personal reasons.

Once the personal reasons have been resolved and we know where we're buying, then we'll start looking again - if prices are affordable.

If they're not we won't.

What financial factors are there that really matter apart from affordability?

DaddyBear

carolt wrote: »

What financial factors are there that really matter apart from affordability?

You need to allow for price drops. They still may happen, so the house you buy needs to be suitable for several years, allowing you to ride any dips that may occur. With so much uncertainty it's all about edging against as many outcomes as possible.