The budget

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

johnthebar wrote: »

what FTB's actually want.

And I'd love to buy a 17 bedroom mansion with a pool for 5p.

What we want is not of any relevance here. :money:

gingertips

The other good news, although need to see more on the detail relates to planning consent to tackle the NIMBYism doggedly slowing down new build developments of proper housing (not just knocking down a large house & replacing it with 6 flats, but proper 3/4/5 bed home developments on a large scale)

Nabbed from Robert Pestons blog on the bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/robertpeston/

Finally there are a raft of reforms to planning and building regimes, which are bound to stir up a hornets' nest.

These include a new presumption that developments should be permitted, unless the local planning authority can advance compelling reasons why they should not - which inverts the current decision-making arrangement, where the developer has to argue the merits.
Also planning decisions must be made within a year. And local authorities can no longer favour brownfield sites over other more pristine sites (though the green belt will continue to be protected).
There'll be a lifting of all restrictions on small modifications and additions to existing developments, which will please big supermarket groups like Asda which argued for it, and it will be easier to change the use of existing buildings (from industrial to residential, for example).
Finally there will be a carrot for local authorities along with a stick, in that they may be given the ability to auction - for the benefit of council taxpayers - the planning permissions attached to parcels of land.
In the round, these planning changes could lead to a massive increase in developments, of both residential and commercial properties. They capture something the Treasury has believed for years, that the growth and competitiveness of the UK has been stifled by building restrictions.

CloudCuckooLand

Getting to take 100% of any increase in equity is also more MSE for the next mortgage/house.


Example

Suppose interest rates were 5%. And HPI averaged 5% over the next 5 years.

£100k house. 5%/£5k deposit. £20k loan. £80k mortgage. = £473 repayment per month.

Wait a little longer build deposit up. £100k house. 10%/£10k deposit. No loan. £90k mortgage. 5.5% for higher LTV. = £559 per month.

£5160 extra over 5 years.

5 years later. House appreciates to £125k. 80% is now worth £100k, up from £80k that's great you say...but you have to remortgage/been saving hard to fund repaying the loan, or start paying interest anyway. And now you owe £25k...

If getting 100%, it is now worth £125k, so for only £10160 more (5160 plus £5k extra deposit funds) you could have gained the other £25k too, and not have to find the loan money to pay back...

If you can remortgage. or want to move up the property ladder, you can then leverage even more. Within lending criteria of course.

£5160 wouldn't gain anything like enough interest to pay the loan off, you'd have to do something else on top. You may struggle to refinance if prices actually drop. And you are reliant on income remaining consistent - so many joint incomes drop when a family is started.

Being over 5 years is not very long to save £20k - if someone thinks its not long then what is all the moaning about how hard it is to save deposits..?!


Third time today. Bulls spout about leverage normally. Today, because they want to wind people up about pretending to "help FTBs" suddenly they've forgotten the basics of leveraging...

If you are going to do it, within sensible limits, do it to the max. Otherwise its just lost time/gain.

The loan is delaying your leveraging and therefore the long-term gain.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

ILW wrote: »

I agree, at least this scheme is only for new builds so something positive may come out of it.

Yep.

The housing shortage is reaching crisis levels. We need a lot of new houses no matter what people think of prices.

And as the biggest barrier to entry is deposit finance, then this scheme will help at least a few thousand of the hundreds of thousands of potential FTB's currently locked out of the market.

poppysarah

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Yep.

The housing shortage is reaching crisis levels. We need a lot of new houses no matter what people think of prices.
.

Actually we probably don't.

There's a few hundred thousand homes under prescot's scheme that could be put back into use for a few quid. (Less than the huge sum developers have creamed off in the 9 years the plan was in action)

There's 1 M empty homes on top of that.

There's probably 1M underoccupied homes.

What we do need is LOWER HOUSE PRICES and LOWER RENTS.

A report recently directly linked high house prices to child poverty.

The less you spend on your essentials like housing the more money you have to spend in the wider economy.

JimBobMarj

tiny_tear wrote: »

I read the things on the metro this morning.
it just doesn't make sense also that this loan seems to be available only to people buying (overpriced) new builds - so it will help the developers trying to sell the new builds but not help people like me trying to sell my FTB 1-bed flat

Going back to Tiny_tear though. What impact is this going to have on people like us who are trying to sell their FTB flat, the market was rubbish anyway with me being told it was suitable for a FTB'er or older person. The budget has just taken a chunk out of my potential market.:mad:

Stu_Dent

So how do I take advantage of this scheme? are there particular companies that will be running it?

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

poppysarah wrote: »

There's 1 M empty homes on top of that.

*sigh*

Not this old chestnut.

The empty homes agency states that there are somewhere around 800K "empty" houses.

Of those, 50% are empty for less than 12 months as part of the normal and continuously recirculating process of refurbishing, probate, etc.

Of the remaining 400K, around three quarters are either derelict, due for demolition, etc.

And of the rest, most are simply in the wrong place for current demand.

Regardless of which..... It makes not the slightest difference how many houses are empty, if they're not available for sale or rent, then they might as well not exist at all.

There's probably 1M underoccupied homes.

Which is also completely irrelevant.

Again, if they're not available, it makes no difference.

What we do need is LOWER HOUSE PRICES and LOWER RENTS.

And you have ZERO CHANCE of getting that without a massive housebuilding programme.

The current shortage is massive, and it's worsening by 100,000 houses or more each and every year.

Population is growing by 400,000 people a year, new additional households form at the rate of 250,000 a year, and we build just over 100,000 houses a year. New residential development starts are down by 41% year on year.

It's beyond a crisis....

We need millions more houses within the next decade or two, and we have almost no chance of getting them. Which is why the next boom is going to be a monster, particularly as the biggest generation in history, bigger than the boomers, is about to reach FTB age.

A report recently directly linked high house prices to child poverty.

The less you spend on your essentials like housing the more money you have to spend in the wider economy.

Oh please stop quoting that same old tired and discredited hpc tripe.

The recent calls over there to exploit child poverty as fallacious hpc propaganda on other websites are sickening, and you've been complicit in much of it.

Like the thread you started calling on hpc-ers to use child poverty as a "new angle" to promote the crash agenda.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Lot of media coverage today about the FTB assistance scheme.

Nobody seems to know how to apply for it yet.

Presumably through the housebuilders... Probably won't be long until it's fully subscribed though.

rodman

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/HomeAndCommunity/BuyingAndSellingYourHome/HomeBuyingSchemes/DG_073696