House prices....

wifeforlife

AlwaysWorking wrote: »

I would be wary of putting too much emphasis on the LPS values. Valuers had sooo many to get through that not much time could be devoted to each street, never mind each house!

As an example, my house was valued at nearly 10% more than I paid for it, ten months after the valuation date in a rapidly rising market. I put in an application to have it reassessed and spoke to the valuer by telephone (she never visited). She began the conversation by saying that she was happy with the valuation. I explained that I had bought the house late 2005 for less than they had valued it at and that I had paid the full asking price. The house was in average condition. I asked what sales evidence she had...being ex LPS I knew she had none as there had been no recent house sales in my area (not that I told her this!!). She accepted my argument immediately and amended my valuation....so now my house is valued at quite a bit less than all of the other houses in my street.

Since then I have completely revamped the house...new heating system, internal and external doors, floors, kitchen, bathroom etc. So if I was to put my house on the market, I wouldn't like to think anyone would think it was worth LPS estimate, or that it was worth less than a neighbouring property just because the LPS website shows it is!!!!!

Any re-val on a property, must be done in writing by appeal to the District valuer, I doubt any valuer would have reduced your CV over the phone. If you did your the only person to do so, and I would love to know the member of staff's name.

I put in a re-val before my house was valued, it was a new build in a new development. I know it's higher than 2005 prices. We paid £102k in July 2009, they valued at £105 and common sense and a look on the net would tell you the same house would be £85k in 2005. I've went the whole way through the appeal process and they've refused to budge on the valuation.

I'm ex RCA staff but now LPS so have an interest in this.

Leftie I suppose as long as your not looking at new builds, or anything built after 2008 your going to get a decent enough deal if they're using the capital value system. If you've sold a few years ago your in a good place to look around and get a good deal. Good Luck with it

Cate

tight_arze

grogdog wrote: »

i wouldnt take the rateable value of the property as the martket value. ours at the height was 250k and now probably around 130-140k but rateable value is 90k.

The rateable value should be very close to the market value. Rateable value was calculated in 2005 and house prices are supposedly at 2005 levels so there really shouldnt be any more than 10-15k difference.

A friend of mine bought his house for 105k in North Down in 2005, houses in this area are now priced at 155k. Still very over priced.

itsmylife_2

We just sold our house for 5k over what we paid for it in 2004, so it would be safe to say that houses are around the 2005 price, a bit gutting for us, but we needed to sell, and thats what people were willing to pay! If we were buying again I'd definitely be making a cheeky offer!

NAR

Leftie I also agree we have probably reached 2005 price levels. How much further will prices fall? Budget/job losses may well have an impact in 2011, but I think it will be down to the banks to stop the slide by making more affordable mortgages available.

x12yhp

NAR wrote: »

Leftie I also agree we have probably reached 2005 price levels. How much further will prices fall? Budget/job losses may well have an impact in 2011, but I think it will be down to the banks to stop the slide by making more affordable mortgages available.

That is all well and good.... until we have to try and control inflation and the rates are bumped.

Prices have got to get to a level where they are affordable with a sensible interest rate... any intelligent person would not think about if they can afford today, it is whether they can afford tomorrow. It is all well and good to get people buying again but is inflationary in itself, only increasing the risk of rate rises.

leftieM

Mortgages are very affordable - we can get a 2.39% variable rate mortgage. We can get about 3-4% fixed rates. That is unprecedentedly cheap. Banks are restricting lending to people who have a deposit (which protects the banks from negative equity on repossession) and have a steady income. I don't see that changing in the future.
House prices here are too high still. I don't dispute that. Houses don't sell because most people (generally owner occupiers) don't accept current value as it is and buyers can't pay over the odds for houses because the banks won't sanction the loans for them. The stuff that we have a chance to buy is all repossession/investors off-loading/probate.

x12yhp

leftieM wrote: »

Banks are restricting lending to people who have a deposit (which protects the banks from negative equity on repossession) and have a steady income.

This is the simple, sensible sort of statement which so many people just do not get. The fact that, for so many years, a person could get access to hundreds of thousands of pounds with limited protection to the lender, no evidence of any ability to save when needed and no proof that they actually can afford it, is frankly preposterous.

More and more people do appreciate this but it irritates me that so many, who were victim of the above 'freedom' in the system, are so keen to get other people into the same trap just so that they can get out of their own mess.

:mad:

southantrim3

leftieM wrote: »

Mortgages are very affordable - we can get a 2.39% variable rate mortgage. We can get about 3-4% fixed rates. That is unprecedentedly cheap. Banks are restricting lending to people who have a deposit (which protects the banks from negative equity on repossession) and have a steady income. I don't see that changing in the future.
House prices here are too high still. I don't dispute that. Houses don't sell because most people (generally owner occupiers) don't accept current value as it is and buyers can't pay over the odds for houses because the banks won't sanction the loans for them. The stuff that we have a chance to buy is all repossession/investors off-loading/probate.

They might be affordable now, but be very wary with variable rates, in a few years time these could realistically be at 6-7% which would add a small fortune on to your repayment.

I would currently go for fixed rate, which currently are more than variable but give you a hell of a lot more security, and fix it for as long as you can.

All the best :cool:

x12yhp

Just to go on with that theme....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/8220862/Homeowners-should-prepare-for-interest-rates-of-5pc-warns-Bank-of-England-markets-chief-Paul-Fisher.html

These are not just scare tactics... all those complacent on very low, variable or short term 'special' rates should be very aware of this and will hopefully have factored it into their thinking.

Another link for you is:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-12065981

It is clear that not all of the off-plan buyers will be getting away without too much pain. With more and more of these cases coming up, we could see a bit of a torrent of properties coming onto the market as the developer is able to sell at 'market' value knowing that the initial buyer has to cover the difference.

Some lovely bear food for christmas - all of us waiting for market sense can only be happy at these developments.

mark206000

Although most reporting is of house prices rising today a quick read of the actual Nationwide report contains.....

“Northern Ireland was the worst performing region for
the third year running, with prices down 8.9% year-on-
year, slightly worse than the 6.7% fall seen in 2009.
Average prices in the province are down a remarkable
45% from their 2007 peak.

Average house price £125,637
Annual percentage change -8.9%

As a potentail FTB myself