Has it worked out for you

pbouk

The_White_Horse wrote: »

sounds like utter garbage to me. You saved up enough cash to buy an entire house in 5 years or so and clearly still paid rent at the same time.

i smell something..... and it's bs.

sounds like envy on your part to me. i have saved it up by living FRUGALLY,not frittering my money on excessive living. i will admit tho that i dont have any children which would have made it difficult to save quickly.

ukcarper

pbouk wrote: »

sounds like envy on your part to me. i have saved it up by living FRUGALLY,not frittering my money on excessive living. i will admit tho that i dont have any children which would have made it difficult to save quickly.

And they say It’s going to take FTBs until they are 44 to save deposit while you saved the whole price of a house in 3 to 4 years perhaps you could give them lessons in saving.

pbouk

SUFFER_THE_LITTLE_GHOULS wrote: »

You hit the head on the nail. I bet all this ghoul can boast is enough cash deposit for a slum in stabsville. Probably been staying at home leeching off mummys teat too.

again sounds like envy to me, you obviously bought at the peak when others like me were waiting it out. where is this "STABSVILLE" you talk about. i shared with my gf.

pbouk

RenovationMan wrote: »

I have to put my hand up and admit that I am dubious of this poster's claims and generally of most people who claim to have rented until they can buy 100% cash. Logically, why would anyone do that? Lets see an example:

Year 1 of renting while saving to buy a house. 1 bed apartment costs £500pm. 100% Mortgage on 1 bed apartment would cost £800pm

Year 10 of renting while saving to buy a house. 1 bed apartment costs £600pm. 40% mortgage on a 1 bed apartment would cost £300pm.

This is my question. With such a large equity pot, why would anyone stay renting when they could have bought and paid less each year for their accomodation (and then have more disposible income in which to overpay their mortgage).

Sorry, it just doesnt make any sense and that's forgetting that most of these guys arent saving for 10 years, they seem to have been going for 3 years. Unless they are bankers, I just cant see how they can get so much money together so quickly. Mortgages are 25 years long for a reason.

As a final observation. If houses were so easy to save for and so inexpensive that people could buy them outright after 5 or so years of hard saving. What is all the fuss about from the bearish clan?

i never rented alone!!!!
i can buy outright now because prices are FALLING.

pbouk

The_White_Horse wrote: »

so 3-5 years ago, you had enough for a 10% or possibly 20% deposit - and now, you magically have enough for a whole property. the full 100%. saved up in 3-5 years.

if that was the case, you would have still been better of getting a mortgage and investing the money saved.

you are an idiot. and a liar.

5 years ago i didnt even want to buy a house
5 years ago i was given promotion so I AM CLEARLY NOT AN IDIOT u are thats why u bought at the peak and now you are dreading the prices fslling snd the rates rising.

Cleaver

pbouk wrote: »

no, what i meant was if i had bought 3-5 yrs ago with little or no deposit, i would have been in the frame of mind to just pay the mortgage over 20-25yrs etc. i have not come into any money.

But your original post talked about interest rates and crashes? What you're basically saying is that 3 years ago you weren't good with money, whereas you are now. Good for you and everything, but I'm not really sure what point you're making?

It sounds fantastic that you've got your act together and are able to save tens of thousands of pounds a year. Good for you. But I'm just saying that if this is the case, it's a change of mindset that did this for you, not the fact that you decided not to buy a house. You could have just bought a house and drastically paid off the mortgage instead of drastically saving. Pretty much the same difference, but you would have got to live in a house for a bit longer. Swings and roundabouts really.

pbouk

SUFFER_THE_LITTLE_GHOULS wrote: »

!!!!!!!!. On post 16 you said "i have not been doing anything crazy, just living within my means."

yes, i never racked up huge credit card debts in the good times, i never had a mortgage to re-mortgage and re-mortgage.

pbouk

Cleaver wrote: »

But your original post talked about interest rates and crashes? What you're basically saying is that 3 years ago you weren't good with money, whereas you are now. Good for you and everything, but I'm not really sure what point you're making?

It sounds fantastic that you've got your act together and are able to save tens of thousands of pounds a year. Good for you. But I'm just saying that if this is the case, it's a change of mindset that did this for you, not the fact that you decided not to buy a house. You could have just bought a house and drastically paid off the mortgage instead of drastically saving. Pretty much the same difference, but you would have got to live in a house for a bit longer. Swings and roundabouts really.

no i was ok with money, used to spend on clothes etc but i was ok. but its what i have already said that if i got a house a few yrs ago i would have been in the mind set of paying interest each month.

pbouk

RenovationMan wrote: »

Why buy now, why not wait a few more years? Prices are still falling and are not going to go up any time soon. Instead of a 2 bed terrace, you could jump up the ladder and get a 3 bed semi or better. Great for you and your GF when those kids come along.

thats what i am thinking, it is tempting to buy now but i think i will probably just see what happens this yr. i only started the post because i know there are ppl like me who have good deposits and i wanted to know how they were thinking!

Cleaver

pbouk wrote: »

i never rented alone!!!!
i can buy outright now because prices are FALLING.

No, you've been able to buy a house because you saved loads and loads of money. House prices are about the same now as they were five years ago. Okay, let's look in more detail.

Five years ago the house you wanted was £100,000. You say that you have managed to buy outright, so presumably you've been able to save £20,000 a year for the past five years. House prices are roughly the same now as they were five years ago, give or take +/-10% depending on where you are in the country.

So you had two choices. You could not buy five years ago and save £20,000 a year, thus being able to buy now. Which is what you've done.

Or, you could have bought five years ago and paid £20,000 towards your mortgage each year over the past five years. Let's say you took a 100% mortgage on £100,000 in 2005 and paid £20,000 off the capital each year. You would have paid off around £85,000 of that mortgage and would now owe just £15,000. But presumably you've had to live somewhere in the meantime, and thus paid rent. Or you've lived at home and saving £15,000 has been worth it not to own your own home for half a decade.

I'm not knocking what you've done, it's great that you've bought a house outright. I'm just saying that you've not saved hundreds of thousands by doing it.

God I'm bored tonight. Is Generali or Dopester around for a good old debate about inflationary monetary cycles in 19th century Hungary? Or how to stockpile rice?