Parents want a house price FALL to help their children get on the property ladder

Percy1983

The whole inheritance arguement doesn't work, whatever my parents house is worth at the time of there death will mean I will inherit half of that worth.

Now the figure isn't relevant as that money would get me half of a house at that time whatever the amounts are.

The difference is will we be able to afford houses and inherit a nice payment to go against it, or should we have to wait until our parents die before we can buy a house?

Really2

Percy1983 wrote: »

The difference is will we be able to afford houses and inherit a nice payment to go against it, or should we have to wait until our parents die before we can buy a house?

Personally from our family's point of view inheritance looks like it is now being left to grand children not children.
I presume this is happening more due to people living longer, why not give the youngest of the family's the best start? I presumed they would have done it in the past had more lived to see grandchildren (also if they had any assets of any worth).

silvercar

Percy1983 wrote: »

The whole inheritance arguement doesn't work, whatever my parents house is worth at the time of there death will mean I will inherit half of that worth.

Now the figure isn't relevant as that money would get me half of a house at that time whatever the amounts are.

The difference is will we be able to afford houses and inherit a nice payment to go against it, or should we have to wait until our parents die before we can buy a house?

Its not that simple. You could be using your inheritance to move to a bigger property.

There are also parents (or grandparents) who move to smaller properties and release equity to give their children deposits.

Remember there a lot of pensioners who are property-rich and cash-poor. They may want to trade down to use the equity released to fund their retirement. They may prefer to do this than have to rely on their children to help them out in retirement given the poor interest rate they would get on savings.

ukcarper

Really2 wrote: »

Personally from our family's point of view inheritance looks like it is now being left to grand children not children.
I presume this is happening more due to people living longer, why not give the youngest of the family's the best start? I presumed they would have done it in the past had more lived to see grandchildren (also if they had any assets of any worth).

Could it be that their children already have their own houses and a reasonable life style.

Really2

ukcarper wrote: »

Could it be that their children already have their own houses and a reasonable life style.

Yes I believe so, realy the current batch of 65+ are the first generation of poorer house owners.

Pre 1945 how many below the top 10% of the population could buy?

IveSeenTheLight

Really2 wrote: »

I should imagine age of child has something to do with it. I would say anyone with a child or children under 8 and have purchased in the last 8 years dont want them to fall yet.

I should imagine those with children 15+ do and that have nearly paid of their mortgage do.

I can't see many saying they would like to go in NE now so on the of chance their 3 year old will buy a house at 18 in 15 years time.

Being a good parent is looking after you r child now and sorting out their future as much as possible.
It is also advisable to make sure your children have a good nest egg for when they are an adult.
Wanting prices is not enough, people need to prepare their children more also. If prices don't fall back at least if you have arrange for your child to have options by saving / investing for their future.

Also I agree with what others say, they want other peoples house prices to drop, not there own.:)

Sums up my position.

I'm a parent and don't want property prices to fall.
I'm preparing for my childrens future so they can deal with it and am also ensuring they are adequately supported if need be.

Falling prices would mean that my childrens future is less secure

IveSeenTheLight

ILW wrote: »

Off the top of my head:

High rate of capital gains tax on investment residential property (BTL) unless the investment was in new build for rental.

I believe that it costs around £90k to build a modest house (much less for flats) and much of the selling price is land costs. A high tax on undeveloped building land would get things moving and help bring down the cost of the land thereby reducing prices.

Higher rates to capital gains will only mean investors are less likely to sell.
If you want investors to sell, lower rates would create more interest.

You are also disregarding that the amount of rental properties as a percentage of the total number of properties that there are.

for years, the number of rental properties decreased as a percentage of the stock regardless that Private invested property underpinned the sell off of social housing.

doire_2

CLAPTON wrote: »

lower house prices and lots of mortgages seems like good news for FTB
lower houses but no mortgages available doesn't seem so good

FTB should save for a good deposit then

Sibley

Sums up my position.

I'm a parent and don't want property prices to fall.
I'm preparing for my childrens future so they can deal with it and am also ensuring they are adequately supported if need be.

Falling prices would mean that my childrens future is less secure

Same here. The more prices rise the happier I feel. I don't want prices to drop 1 pence. Our houses are our future.

ruggedtoast

lemonjelly wrote: »

When I worked in housing, it was quite amazing how many retired people had repeatedly remortgaged (for whatever reason) & were mortgaged to the hilt on their property.

Problem being, they were applying to the housing associations for accommodation, because they knew that they would shortly be unable to remain in the property, as their repayments were unsustainable.

It was, I feel, quite scary. We would reciev a number of applications weekly from local people who had bought years ago, hell some of them had even been mortgage free years ago, & were now £200k+ in debt.

A couple of things perplexed me about this:

1 who is lending someone in their 60's (I did a survey over a 3 month period & the average age was 67) such huge sums of money? Was it realistic to believe they would be able to repay the full amount?

2 Quite a few were people who had bought the houses ridiculously cheaply via the right to buy (£12k for a 3 bed house in the 80's). The house would now be worth £200K plus, but was fully mortgaged.

The lenders dont care if the oldies repay it or not as long as they end up with the asset its secured against, the house, being worth more than the debt.

MEWing varies but a lot of the products aimed at pensioners werent great deals. Some people paid back a usuruious rate of interest on their loans and then still lost the controlling interest in their house and had little to pass to their kids.

It works both ways though. My friend's 'nana' mewed the living daylights out of her house, until there was no more to mew. Then she found another company and mewed a last £12500 dream holiday to Australia for the family.

Then she stuck two post 2007 fingers up at the lenders and said they'd have to go to court to get her out, and even when they did she'd just move in with her daughter.


What are they going to do, shes 84!