ROS: Scotland Reaches ANOTHER new peak price.

IveSeenTheLight

kriss_boy wrote: »

Youre asking me to provide facts yet the volume of properties sold in Scotland in June 2010 only represented approx 0.28% of the housing stock. How can such a miniscule volume represent the value of the remaining 99.7% of properties.

Your using June 2010 which showed 7106 transactions to say it is approx 0.28% of the total volume, yet three years earlier the transaction levels were 13,782.

This means even near the peak, the transactions were only 0.54% of the market.

I'm pretty sure you'd see similar small percentages of transactions with the LR

kriss_boy wrote: »

I stand by my original point that logically people are more likely to sell their properties for a profit than a loss... and so those currently in negatively equity as a result of the crash remain excluded from many of the indicators of property values.

I take your point, but they are not selling are they.
Take a £150k mortgaged property now valued at £130k. It's not likely to sell is it, until the property value increases above the £150k again. So doubtful your going to get the property cheap.

Presumably from your point, when they rise, they will stifle the indices as they come into play

kriss_boy wrote: »

I put in offer after offer in 2007/2008 on beat up 1 bed, ground floor flats at around 75K with no luck. Fast forward 2 years and my mate had the luxury of having first dibs on half a dozen 2 bed, rennovated flats in the same street. He got his for 73K.

You friend has taken advantage of the situation.
You havent ??????????

kriss_boy wrote: »

To me its blatantly obvious house prices are notably lower today than they were in 2007. At least in Fife they are!

I recall going through this with you before, taking specific properties in Kirkcaldy and referencing them to recent sold prices.

Let me do the search again for you
Here you go
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=33937433&postcount=11

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=33937489&postcount=12

kriss_boy

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Your using June 2010 which showed 7106 transactions to say it is approx 0.28% of the total volume, yet three years earlier the transaction levels were 13,782.

This means even near the peak, the transactions were only 0.54% of the market.

My point was simply that sold prices dont reflect the intrinsic value of property. They are a reasonably indicator but when you factor in the recession and small sales volumes they are prone to inaccuracies.

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I take your point, but they are not selling are they.
Take a £150k mortgaged property now valued at £130k. It's not likely to sell is it, until the property value increases above the £150k again.

As I said earlier I believe in 4/5 years time, for this very reason, stats will indicate house prices have levelled off.

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I recall going through this with you before, taking specific properties in Kirkcaldy and referencing them to recent sold prices.

Let me do the search again for you
Here you go
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=33937433&postcount=11

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=33937489&postcount=12

The problem is you dont know anything about the condition of the properties, I do. Your just finding streets that comply with the trend of marginally rising house prices.

I on the other hand keep a copy of the schedule of many properties that come onto the market.

IveSeenTheLight

kriss_boy wrote: »

The problem is you dont know anything about the condition of the properties, I do. Your just finding streets that comply with the trend of marginally rising house prices.

I on the other hand keep a copy of the schedule of many properties that come onto the market.

Your right, I don't know the condition of the properties.
An average is an average though, it will take into account the various conditions of properties that sold.

I did not do a thorough search on your area. I just picked a couple of random areas.
Interesting that the random areas both showed similar sales in 2010 as they did in 2007.

You seem to want to relate to your personal copy of the schedules and ignore the blatant facts from the ROSEA and NETHOUSEPRICES etc then go ahead.

As we don't have such access to your wonderful database of facts, I think most of us will stick to the wider more accepted data available.

molerat

Nice pics there of Union Terrace Gardens, soon to be replaced by a lump of concrete because Woody says " the economy of the city will collapse if we don't invest in this scheme". It is a horrible dirty place, apart from the few nice outlying areas, run by a council of buffoons too easily giving in to big business pressure and a university tarnished by its latest honorary doctorate. http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/1954836

IveSeenTheLight

molerat wrote: »

Nice pics there of Union Terrace Gardens, soon to be replaced by a lump of concrete because Woody says " the economy of the city will collapse if we don't invest in this scheme". It is a horrible dirty place, apart from the few nice outlying areas, run by a council of buffoons too easily giving in to big business pressure and a university tarnished by its latest honorary doctorate. http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/1954836

Hardly going to replace the gardens with £150 Million lump of concrete now is it?

Union Terrace Gardens is not how it used to be used.

It was also undergoing a revamp from Peacock Visual Arts.

As I understand it, the Union Terrace Gardens will incorporate an arts display area as well as bringing in additional economic benefits to the city.

Aberdeen missed out on an opportunity when the Oil kicked off to seriously upgrade the area and it's surrounding area.
The governement also regularly place frunds more in the central belt leaving the residents of Aberdeen to foot the bill time and time again.
Surely it's good if investors wish to invest in the city.

Aberdeen has a common good fund, currently in excess of £45 Million.
Problem appears that if the council try and use it, the governements (historically speaking) advise that if they do they will reduce the amount from the following years budgets

macadamia_2

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

ROS August 2010

Aberdeen: £194,964 -- New Peak

Aberdeenshire £216,900-- New Peak

Edinburgh £235,088 -- New Peak.

Scotland £167,238 -- New Peak


I think if you have a look at the Aberdeen forum on the House Price Crash website you'll find lots of interesting stuff going on there this week! As the poster says "panic" is in the air.

IveSeenTheLight

macadamia wrote: »

I think if you have a look at the Aberdeen forum on the House Price Crash website you'll find lots of interesting stuff going on there this week! As the poster says "panic" is in the air.

LOL 'Panic in the air'

My FIL is selling one of his properties at the moment.
Got a bid from his first viewer £15k (7.3%) under the valuation and he turned it down.
He had bookings for another 3 viewings yesterday.

We'll see how this 'Panic' Turns out

P.S. did you see the graph I posted with data from the ROSEA?
Feel free to post it on the HPC so they can see some facts
P.P.S. I just posted the graph on HPC, just in case you didn't

Graham_Devon

Aberdeen will be the first to see long term disability benefits reassessed. So could see people moved over to JSA.

DervProf

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Aberdeen will be the first to see long term disability benefits reassessed. So could see people moved over to JSA.

Does that include mental disability ?

Graham_Devon

DervProf wrote: »

Does that include mental disability ?

Dunno, I'd guess so.