Repo's to rise in 2011.

chucky

Graham_Devon wrote: »

That's pretty high on the desperado scale.

No.

ISTL doesn't sound too desperate...

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Indeed, I have a property that gets £1,100 per month (rented below market value) whilst the mortgage statement I just received stated the monthly mortgage interest was only £95 per month

he sounds like someone who is doing quite well for himself...

take your bitterness somewhere else Devon and look in the mirror...

IveSeenTheLight

Graham_Devon wrote: »

That's pretty high on the desperado scale.

No.

It's certainly not desperation Graham.
I'm simply taking something you said upon my personal circumstance, considering it, offering an alternative view based on other recent discussions and posing the thoughts back for your consideration.

If in your consideration you feel offended by the discussion, then please don;t try to be, it's simply an open conversation for discussion and offer alternative viewpoints.

the point is still valid though, if people that can't afford the mortgage and may be subjected to reposessions is all fair in love and war, should there be the offer of part ownership?

Percy1983

I will admit a level of bitterness on my half, if I could be a such a position and missed it then it would be my own fault and fair enough, but as it is I was born to late to get in such a position.

On the flip side just about any boomer, could cash in the equity on there over inflated houses and buy a second/third/etc, thank god not all of them have been driven through life my sheer greed.

On the flipside I am quite happy that against the odds despite both being born in 1983 my other half and I have worked hard and will soon get a house of our own without ever feeding the greedy.

IveSeenTheLight

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Remind me why there is high rental demand?

There are a number of people who choose to rent.

I rent out one property to a German professor who due to personal circumstances has decided to rent from me in the last 4 years.

I rent out another property to students who choose to rent over the term year before moving on to toher parts of the UK.

I have a colleague who rents a property 87 miles away from his family home, only returning ther at the weekends (something seen throught the UK)

Some people can;t afford to buy. Some people will never be able to afford to buy.

There will always be a rental market and we've seen in the last two decades that this is a reducing market share percentage and the answer is not to reduce that even further to the benefit of one market and the worsening of another market.

The answer is to build more owner occupancy and rental propoerties to control the prices of both markets.
something you choose not to acknowledge or provide focus on.

IveSeenTheLight

Percy1983 wrote: »

On the flipside I am quite happy that against the odds despite both being born in 1983 my other half and I have worked hard and will soon get a house of our own without ever feeding the greedy.

I know people born after 1983 that have been able to buy property through their own merits.

You should try to refrain from comments such as "without ever feeding the greedy" as it diminishes the impact and infers a level of bitterness that detracts from the point you are trying to make.

Landlords merely supply to a market and it's the market choice to be part of it or not as in your case.

Indeed, you appear to help other people who do need to rent by removing yourself from the demand and thus helping prices not to be driven even higher than they would be

Percy1983

Now I won't agrue there is a need for a rental market, but how many of them do want to own but can't because prices are high. I did see it a lot of in my area that a lot of cheap 'FTB homes' actually went to landlords.

In short the rental market has been inflated by the rental market.

By all means I completely agree that the best way forward is to build more.

IveSeenTheLight

Percy1983 wrote: »

Now I won't agrue there is a need for a rental market, but how many of them do want to own but can't because prices are high. I did see it a lot of in my area that a lot of cheap 'FTB homes' actually went to landlords.

In short the rental market has been inflated by the rental market.

By all means I completely agree that the best way forward is to build more.

We need to be careful or we'll get into a credit related discussion shortly, however recent generations have had the luxury of available credit and opportunity to purchase that saw the owner occupancy reach an all time high circa 70%.

It's quite plausible that due to credit constraints and house prices that they will revert to further back generations where owner occupancy was far lower and people simply rented

Percy1983

This is true and in many ways I don't have a problem with this.

In the build up to 2007-08 it didn't matter how good/bad you finances where you could buy due to lax lending which basically meant anybody who fancied a house could afford one and the competition forced prices up.

Now for prices to drop and credit to be constrained would again lead to people being priced out, but more so due to there own finances and how they have managed them rather than prices have just got out of reach, meanwhile those who have kept everything in order will be able to buy without competition form the fincially inept.

Dell

Percy1983 wrote: »

Now I won't agrue there is a need for a rental market, but how many of them do want to own but can't because prices are high. I did see it a lot of in my area that a lot of cheap 'FTB homes' actually went to landlords.

In short the rental market has been inflated by the rental market.

By all means I completely agree that the best way forward is to build more.

Or earnings to go up to the long term norm in relation to house prices. Or dare I say house prices to come down to meet the the long term norm in relation to earnings.

It doesnt matter how many people would fancy living in a certain property, all that matters is how many people can raise funds to buy it.

IveSeenTheLight

Dell wrote: »

Or earnings to go up to the long term norm in relation to house prices. Or dare I say house prices to come down to meet the the long term norm in relation to earnings.

It doesnt matter how many people would fancy living in a certain property, all that matters is how many people can raise funds to buy it.

Exactly and with the restriction on available properties (both due to available credit and the quantity) in relation to the increase in population, it would appear that the likelyhood is that only the higher earners (wealthier) will have the opportunity to buy.