12 reasons to not buy a house

JohnHunter

Really2 wrote: »

But you prefer the added cost and uncertainty of renting. ? Interesting.

There is more uncertainty in owning than renting. If we are indeed looking at a 50% real fall in house values from top to bottom then you are better off renting and buying near the bottom of the crash.

But the 70% club could still be right when interest rates go back up we will see how many repossessions fill the auction houses and then how low the bottom of the crash will be.

Either way more uncertainty in how far property will fall, than how much rents will fall when the housing benefit cuts come in.

JonnyBravo

Nice knowing you "John". Don't let the door hit your **** on the way to your PPR.

Really2

JohnHunter wrote: »

There is more uncertainty in owning than renting. If we are indeed looking at a 50% real fall in house values from top to bottom then you are better off renting and buying near the bottom of the crash.

But the 70% club could still be right when interest rates go back up we will see how many repossessions fill the auction houses and then how low the bottom of the crash will be.

Either way more uncertainty in how far property will fall, than how much rents will fall when the housing benefit cuts come in.

Newbie answers question to another member from 8 months ago.
Wonder if they are a sockie?:think:

IveSeenTheLight

Pimperne1 wrote: »

But the benefit if on the landlord as much as the tenant. 10% of the rent of furnished properties is allowed to be retained by the LL before any other consideration so for the average rent (say about £600) the landlord has £720 a year to pay for furniture dilapidations.

If my tenants caused half as much in dilapidations as that in a year they would be moving on.

Come now, we know that the cost to wear and tear is nowhere near the 10% allowance.

This just allows the landlord additional tax free profit.

JohnHunter

B_Blank wrote: »

1, Dont have to get buildings insurance
2, Dont have to pay to repair things like water leaks/the roof
3, If they build a nuclear power station next door you can just move
4, if they build a land fill site next door you can just move
5, if the area turns into a ghetto with high crime you can just move
6, You can search for work across a wider geographical area
7, Your not tied down to a single location for 30 years
8, you dont have to pay interest to a bank for 30 years
9, If you neighbours are awful you can just move
10, You dont have to worry about subsidence and other such issues
11, You dont have to worry about the bank/government raising the interest rates you pay
12, You never have to go through the whole buying/selling process which is a nightmare and very expesnive

Simple, just rent and put a portion of your portfolio into property funds. Then your exposed to property so you wont "miss the boat" if there is a dramatic increase in prices, but at the same time you dont have the annoyance of owning a home.

Negative_Equity wrote: »

Excellent post. also
13. Avoiding Negative Equity as house prices continue their steady decline

14. Wait for the bottom of the property value crash, which will not be until interest rates are back to normal and all the repossessions have been cleared out. Then take your time going to auctions and wait for a nice place that did not reach the reserve and go and put a lower offer in

AndyGuil

lippy1923 wrote: »

Correct me if I am wrong, but if you are renting, are you not effectivly buying the home? Maybe not for you, but for your landlord who has brought the home? You just have nothing to show for it.
And the landlord is paying for their own home, if they havnt paid it outright already. So landlord wins both ways. They pay for their 'actual' home, while renters pay for their second home.

That property is losing equity and the cost of rent per tenant can be less than the total equity loss and other costs. Renters also don't have the same risk exposure that owners do. If Europe does hit the fan then we could be looking at a massive crash.

ukcarper

AndyGuil wrote: »

That property is losing equity and the cost of rent per tenant can be less than the total equity loss and other costs.

Not if it is only falling in real terms

AndyGuil

ukcarper wrote: »

Not if it is only falling in real terms

It is falling even more so in real terms, but falling regardless anyway.

movilogo

The biggest advantage of buying a house is that one day you will pay off your mortgage. With renting, you need to pay rent forever.

Rent = short term tactics
Buy = long term strategy

AndyGuil

movilogo wrote: »

The biggest advantage of buying a house is that one day you will pay off your mortgage. With renting, you need to pay rent forever.

Rent = short term tactics
Buy = long term strategy

I agree, renting is short term whilst the market is falling and still higher risk.