Flamin' 'Eck, English House Prices Are Cheap.....

gingerdad

N1AK wrote: »

£108,500 is the average price in the East Midlands!? I (genuinely) trust that the data is from a legitimate source and thus accurate; I'm amazed to see that it could be that low. I've lived in 4 different parts of the East Midlands and have friends in a few more, my limited experience has been vastly different to this. http://www.mouseprice.com/area-guide/heatmap property price maps also seem way out of whack.

Having also lived in North Yorkshire and Manchester I just don't buy that those areas are more expensive on average than the East Midlands...

yes but then you take all the areas of derby, the former mining towns in north notts, leciester etc lots of places that have cheap housing.....

from rightmove
£55,000 - Long Eaton


A semi detached house offered to the market on a 50% equity share basis (part rent, part buy). With UPVC DG and accommodation of lounge, kitchen and to the first floor are the two bedrooms and bathroom. Pleasant sized rear garden. Viewing recommended.

Offers in Region of £84,950 - Derby

Home2Sell are delighted to offer For Sale this spacious first floor apartment situated in a popular residential location with easy access to Derby City Centre and benefits from being offered with No Upward Chain. The property also benefits from gas central heating, PVCu double glazing and in brie...

interestingly in Derby there are currently with in the DE22 post code which covers some of the nice areas like Darley Abbey and Allestree as well as the edge of the city there are 222 properties under 100k on rightmove....

gingerdad

should add i live in the North West the average in the post code are where i live is currently £213,987.but 20 miles down the road its £119,400 (for a 3 bed)

puddy

in the 'averages' of prices how many of those properties are part buy part rent? they are incredibly expensive to pay for on a monthly bassis because you have mortgage, plus rent plus service charges

in addition, in the op, theres talk of someone on minimum wage and the other partner on 25k. many people will never reach a wage of 25k. my partner is on 26 and works in central london, he is 'actiing up' his substantive job pays 20.5 and he is 48.

he is desparate to move to a job nearer home, we live in a deprived area in the southeast and he will be lucky to get 18-20k.

so, up north, outside of big cities i would think the earning potentials are about the same

Really2

puddy wrote: »

in the 'averages' of prices how many of those properties are part buy part rent? they are incredibly expensive to pay for on a monthly bassis because you have mortgage, plus rent plus service charges

Non? they are never usually included in such figures. But even if they were would that no push the price up not lower it?

Also they are cheaper than just buying outright, the rent part is peppercorn rent (and usually the service charge is in this).

It would be a pointless idea if it cost more than buying outright, how would that be affordable housing?

Brallaqueen

I'm really surprised to see employment in Liverpool be so low - last time I was there it had three Universities (University of Liverpool, John Moore, Hope) along with the usual council and bureaucratic underpinnings of a large city.

gingerdad

nembot wrote: »

The average unemployment figure for this area is around 40% with the vast majority of jobs paying close to minimum wage.

Would you prefer to have another go?

[bit of history http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article2314594.ece]

on right move there are over 1000 properties with 3 bedrooms with in 5 miles of L1

puddy

Really2 wrote: »

Non? they are never usually included in such figures. But even if they were would that no push the price up not lower it?

Also they are cheaper than just buying outright, the rent part is peppercorn rent (and usually the service charge is in this).

It would be a pointless idea if it cost more than buying outright, how would that be affordable housing?

yes, thats what i meant, the prices may seem low if the 'affordable housing' was included

with regards to affordability, i have only ever seen schemes in london and the south east and believe me the rent was not peppercorn it was quite substantial and certainly not affordable to me (and at the time i looked at them i was on v good wages.) as an example quite a few i saw were looking at payments of about £800+ per month, which might have been 'cheap' for the price of the whole property, but certainly not 'cheap' when looking at the likely income of a person who they are aimed at. i couldnt afford 800 a month for rent/mortgage and at the time i would have been considered as ineligable for any such scheme because my income would have been too high

therefore i was always left with confusion as to how the target market for those properties could ever afford the rent and mortgage on them

N1AK

gingerdad wrote: »

yes but then you take all the areas of derby, the former mining towns in north notts, leciester etc lots of places that have cheap housing.....

You're absolutely right that poor/cheap areas exist in the East Midlands. To be truthful my experience is in the bottom of the region which will tend to be more expensive. Even with the likes of purgatory (Lincolnshire) I find it really surprising that prices there are noticeably below Wales.

Maybe a few of the places around the bottom that I consider East Midlands aren't classed by them (Northamptonshire, Bedfordshire etc) and the zone that is left is particularly bad.

I live in Daventry, which is about as cheap as they come (within ~40 miles) and prices bear no relation to the £108k they are talking about.

Finally, although the average may be lower due to flats and terrace etc I doubt that the East Midlands has a vastly higher proportion of them than many other areas.

I'm not calling the data false. It just contrasts starkly with what I expected and I'd like to understand why.

N1AK

Really2 wrote: »

It would be a pointless idea if it cost more than buying outright, how would that be affordable housing?

Because requiring a large deposit to buy outright isn't affordable to someone who doesn't have it. Decreasing the deposit amount, but increasing the TCO makes it possible to 'buy'.

I've never seen a reputable source recommend part buy schemes (that's not to say some haven't). All the houses I have seen offered on that basis worked out over-priced considering proportion/cost.

Really2

puddy wrote: »

yes, thats what i meant, the prices may seem low if the 'affordable housing' was included

with regards to affordability, i have only ever seen schemes in london and the south east and believe me the rent was not peppercorn it was quite substantial and certainly not affordable to me (and at the time i looked at them i was on v good wages.) as an example quite a few i saw were looking at payments of about £800+ per month, which might have been 'cheap' for the price of the whole property, but certainly not 'cheap' when looking at the likely income of a person who they are aimed at. i couldnt afford 800 a month for rent/mortgage and at the time i would have been considered as ineligable for any such scheme because my income would have been too high

therefore i was always left with confusion as to how the target market for those properties could ever afford the rent and mortgage on them

Up this end, it is around half the mortgage cost (the rent part) so overall about 75% of the cost of buying.

Here is one.

Two bedroom houses available at a 50% share from £62,500

There is a monthly rental charge from £143.00

Based on a Full Market Value of £125,000


Lounge, kitchen/diner, ground floor WC, family bathroom, 2 bedrooms, enclosed rear gardens with off road parking.