DM: Plight of 1.1m stuck in homes they can't sell

Orpheo

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

Yes, my 100 mile each way commute is completely sensible. You are right, why would I want to see my kids grow up?

!!!!!! is your point?

Your situation seems quite simple, you either sell your house, which is likely going to require that you lower the price, or suck up the 200 mile round trip each day. The wondrous thing is that you get to choose which! Quit whining.

Exocet

Orpheo wrote: »

!!!!!! is your point?

Your situation seems quite simple, you either sell your house, which is likely going to require that you lower the price, or suck up the 200 mile round trip each day. The wondrous thing is that you get to choose which! Quit whining.

I may be mistaken, and please correct me if I have mispoken, but I think the point is that prices within easier commuting are far in excess of what the poster can afford. Therefore if they sell their own house cheaply they have no chance of buying nearer their place of work.

It is of course debatable whether someone should feel free to post that on here, and I suppose one could see it as whining, but I for one would be prepared to allow the benefit of the doubt. This is an open forum and while such statements may be construed as whining, it is perhaps a little unfair to accuse without a more considered approach in the first instance.

Orpheo

Exocet wrote: »

I may be mistaken, and please correct me if I have mispoken, but I think the point is that prices within easier commuting are far in excess of what the poster can afford. Therefore if they sell their own house cheaply they have no chance of buying nearer their place of work.

It is of course debatable whether someone should feel free to post that on here, and I suppose one could see it as whining, but I for one would be prepared to allow the benefit of the doubt. This is an open forum and while such statements may be construed as whining, it is perhaps a little unfair to accuse without a more considered approach in the first instance.

Oh. Well. That clears everything up then.

We all have to overcome the obstacles in our lives. We had to sell our house because our family didn't care to live 250 miles apart. We sold it in 6 weeks because we lowered the price. As for the difference in house prices, perhaps this should have been considered when choosing where to work? Just a thought. If circumstances leave you no choice of where to work then you either move there or commute. Seems to me that what this fellow needs to solve his problem is falling house prices.

Graham_Devon

Exocet wrote: »

I may be mistaken, and please correct me if I have mispoken, but I think the point is that prices within easier commuting are far in excess of what the poster can afford. Therefore if they sell their own house cheaply they have no chance of buying nearer their place of work.

It is of course debatable whether someone should feel free to post that on here, and I suppose one could see it as whining, but I for one would be prepared to allow the benefit of the doubt. This is an open forum and while such statements may be construed as whining, it is perhaps a little unfair to accuse without a more considered approach in the first instance.

I've read many a post from rochdale, and remember one specifically about taking the job as it was such a good job with such a good wage, and the commute being worth it.

I feel this could be construed as bit*hy, or whatever, but to have that line about his kids, in response to my post, when it was completely his own decision to take the job for the money and the commute went with it (and beemer I believe) is, in my mind, whinging.

All I'm saying is you can't take the nice high paying job, which was your own choice, then come back to another poster and say he wants to see his kids grow up. Would be lovely if we could all do that, but we can't.

As the house is up for sale, I'm assuming he CAN afford to move where they desire, otherwise why put it up for sale? Just need to reduce the price, and accept that just because an agent values it at X amount, it doesn't mean thats what it's worth.

Rainmaker_uk

It is virtually impossible to get a mortgage with a sensible deposit if you do not have a squeaky clean credit record.

I unfortunatly got a default 5 years ago (my own fault as I had taken a job abroad and did not sort this bill out).

The best mortgage I have now found is 20% deposit which is annoying as the house we want and can easily afford repayments on requires a silly amount of deposit.

I am now at the point where I am considering having to buy a house at 2x annual income which again seems a little silly.

Until the mortgage market sorts itself out and starts looking sensibly at affordability rather than arbitary 'computer says no' then the knock on effects will continue.

Orpheo

Graham_Devon wrote: »

As the house is up for sale, I'm assuming he CAN afford to move where they desire, otherwise why put it up for sale? Just need to reduce the price, and accept that just because an agent values it at X amount, it doesn't mean thats what it's worth.

A well considered assumption. Thank you.

Graham_Devon

Rainmaker_uk wrote: »

I am now at the point where I am considering having to buy a house at 2x annual income which again seems a little silly.

Sounds like bliss to me.

???

Orpheo

Rainmaker_uk wrote: »

I am now at the point where I am considering having to buy a house at 2x annual income which again seems a little silly.

It may seem silly to you but I won't entertain borrowing any more than than 2x income. Then again I have a 50% deposit.

Exocet

Orpheo wrote: »

It may seem silly to you but I won't entertain borrowing any more than than 2x income. Then again I have a 50% deposit.

Gosh. Sounds like you are in a different position to the 'whiner'.

Orpheo

There seems to be a general lack of understanding as to why, in the current environment, lenders are demanding larger deposits. It is not arbitrary nonsense, it means that there is equity in the property which may serve to protect the lender's stake should they be forced to repossess. It appears that the banks anticipate falling prices.