Some friends of mine desperately need to sell

System

Cleaver wrote: »

You can't guarantee anything can you? You can't guarantee that they will get their magical extra 15% in the next 5 years either.

Look, we're probably talking about a fictional couple here but I'm sure the story represents the situation for a lot of people. If you have a baby and you want a larger house so that, presumably, you and your family can have a better quality of life isn't the risk worth taking?

I normally agree with everything you say but no, I wouldn't risk selling my house on the cheap unless I knew I'd have something else to move into. I'd just put up with less space, as this fictional couple is doing.

Graham_Devon

Joeskeppi wrote: »

I normally agree with everything you say but no, I wouldn't risk selling my house on the cheap unless I knew I'd have something else to move into. I'd just put up with less space, as this fictional couple is doing.

I don't see how it's selling it on the cheap. It's selling it for what people are willing to pay.

That's not "selling it on the cheap". It's just selling it for what it's actually worth.

There seems to be this mentality that peak price is somehow the correct price, and anything else is a bargain, or selling it on the cheap.

ukcarper

Procrastinator333 wrote: »

How did u get 1.15% of people? I make 36,000 / 15m to be 0.24%.

But the point I was going to make is that is the number of peeps who messed it up in 1 year of their 25 year mortgage. I think you need to X25, so 6% over the course of the 25 year mortgage period get repo'd.

Still seems pretty low, but then when you think a proportion of those 15m were 100% owned for the whole period, those defaults are actually out of a smaller pool.

X25 does it actually work that way seems much too simple a calculation to me.

ukcarper

Joeskeppi wrote: »

I normally agree with everything you say but no, I wouldn't risk selling my house on the cheap unless I knew I'd have something else to move into. I'd just put up with less space, as this fictional couple is doing.

You wouldn’t have to sell you could accept the offer and if the seller of the house you want won’t drop you can just pull out. Not very nice I agree but as people seem so sure houses are worth less than they are marketed for it must be ok.

Procrastinator333

ukcarper wrote: »

X25 does it actually work that way seems much too simple a calculation to me.

I gave that a bit of thought. Obviously different owners with different equity have different default risks, many at different points inthe mortgage cycle. But if you accept the profile of equity stakes / ownership cycles is representative of each of the 25 years, then I think the x25 is a fair way of estimating.

I think using the 36k is perhaps a bigger question. Should probably take the average of the last 5 or 10 years. Don't think u should take 25 years as the levels of home ownership were not comparable 25 years back.

But the 36k must be nearer the top end as we are not exactly in happy times.

Many ways to play with it, but I think you need to consider the number who default over the mortgage period, not just 1 year within that period.

ukcarper

Procrastinator333 wrote: »

I gave that a bit of thought. Obviously different owners with different equity have different default risks, many at different points inthe mortgage cycle. But if you accept the profile of equity stakes / ownership cycles is representative of each of the 25 years, then I think the x25 is a fair way of estimating.

I think using the 36k is perhaps a bigger question. Should probably take the average of the last 5 or 10 years. Don't think u should take 25 years as the levels of home ownership were not comparable 25 years back.

But the 36k must be nearer the top end as we are not exactly in happy times.

Many ways to play with it, but I think you need to consider the number who default over the mortgage period, not just 1 year within that period.

Still not convinced for example how many mortgages run full term.

Procrastinator333

ukcarper wrote: »

Still not convinced for example how many mortgages run full term.

If they finish early because they move to a new property, doesn't matter. If it is because they pay it off early, fair point.

But equally, there are some who after 5 or 10 years trade up and start their 25 years again, so might be paying a mortgage for 30-40 years.

Many different variables, estimate how u see best, but taking the repos from just 1 year can't be correct.

ukcarper

Procrastinator333 wrote: »

If they finish early because they move to a new property, doesn't matter. If it is because they pay it off early, fair point.

But equally, there are some who after 5 or 10 years trade up and start their 25 years again, so might be paying a mortgage for 30-40 years.

Many different variables, estimate how u see best, but taking the repos from just 1 year can't be correct.

I agree but it's complicated

Davesnave

Sibley wrote: »

This is the reason there will never be a house price crash. People have choice.

If there were really loads of bargains about I doubt the bears would be spending so much time on here. Surely they would be out viewing. :rotfl:

Here we have HPC denial and a rewriting of history. Very lol.

But I know I didn't dream the crash of 2008, because I used it to my advantage. I'm not out viewing now, because I bagged a bargain last time around.

Now, it looks as if others may get another bite of the cherry, and good luck to them.

Joeskeppi wrote: »

How can they guarantee the next seller will also knock 15% off?

I wouldn't take that risk.

In a nutshell, this is why, despite debating on here, most people who frequent this board will never benefit from the insights it might give them. They are simply too risk-averse.

If I can misquote: 'Faint heart never won fair property.'

blisk3

heretolearn wrote: »

Maybe they don't have a realistic idea of the current market value. If it's priced right, it should sell.

There's no reason for sellers to have realistic price, because eveything still looks ok around them.