We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

Debate House Prices


In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Land Registry Prediction

1810121314

Comments

  • geneer
    geneer Posts: 4,220 Forumite
    robmatic wrote: »
    And an SVR would be a couple of hundred basis points above that. Trackers and fixes were much cheaper though.

    It would be good if you could support that statement.
    In any event I suspect trackers and fixes were not less than the BOE base rate.
  • robmatic
    robmatic Posts: 1,217 Forumite
    geneer wrote: »
    You appear to be stuck in some strange recursive loop.
    I do wonder how many times you can say exactly the same thing.

    Well actually I've done is, using [STRIKE]numbers which seem reasonable[/STRIKE] arbitrary and unrealistic numbers, is support the point I was making.

    Even hamish, with his less likely numbers (for reasons already given) managed to support my point.

    Corrected that for you.
    geneer wrote: »

    Does that mean you Prefer Hamishes simplistic analysis.
    Or, are you going by a "gut feeling".

    I mean going by actual real world numbers and factors.
    geneer wrote: »

    I certainly wouldn't either. Primarily because its their own look in and they can do what they want. I will however look down on someone who, even in the wake of an significant crash still insists that it would be far better to have bought late 2007.

    It seems pretty foolish to ignore the other side of the equation - that people have also enjoyed benefits over the last 4 years for having bought.
    geneer wrote: »

    Not that I'm all that interesting in your own personal position, but what you appear to be telling us is that you waited until after the bulk of the crash to buy.

    Sigh.

    ... and that the benefits of waiting are perhaps not as clear cut as you imagine. However, the benefits of having bought accrue every month.
  • robmatic
    robmatic Posts: 1,217 Forumite
    geneer wrote: »
    It would be good if you could support that statement.

    It would be good if you could support your assertion that typical mortgage rates have been 7.5% over the last 11 years.
    geneer wrote: »
    In any event I suspect trackers and fixes were not less than the BOE base rate.

    Some things I suspect might blow your mind, man.
  • geneer
    geneer Posts: 4,220 Forumite
    robmatic wrote: »
    Corrected that for you.

    No, you haven't. You've simply dismissed it.
    For no logical reason I can determine.
    robmatic wrote: »
    I mean going by actual real world numbers and factors.

    Please enlight us as to what you consider real world numbers and factors.
    robmatic wrote: »



    It seems pretty foolish to ignore the other side of the equation - that people have also enjoyed benefits over the last 4 years for having bought.




    Since we've clearly demonstrated that you cannot be refering to a financial benefit, you must be refering to intangible subjective benefits. Which, in all honest, isn't that interesting.
    robmatic wrote: »



    ... and that the benefits of waiting are perhaps not as clear cut as you imagine. However, the benefits of having bought accrue every month.

    Except financially the benefits are pretty clear cut.
    Whether you go with my approximate sums, which you seem to disagree with, or Hamishes impossible sums.
  • geneer
    geneer Posts: 4,220 Forumite
    edited 1 August 2011 at 7:30PM
    robmatic wrote: »
    It would be good if you could support your assertion that typical mortgage rates have been 7.5% over the last 11 years.

    No probs.
    http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/graphs-base-rate-uk.php

    SVRs range between 9% to 5%, outside of the unprecedented emergency base rate blips of the last couple of years.

    Please don't forget, I'm also having to select a figure which we can project across the next quarter century.

    Now its your turn....
    robmatic wrote: »
    It would be good if you could support your assertion that typical mortgage rates have been 7.5% over the last 11 years.

    True. But its not going to be mortgage rates lower than base rates.
  • wotsthat
    wotsthat Posts: 11,325 Forumite
    geneer wrote: »
    More credible than 5%.
    And looking back over the last 11 years, the average for typical mortgage rates does look to be about 7.5%.

    Well I've looked back at what I've paid myself over the last 11 years 7.5% seems is far from typical. You've got this wrong.
    geneer wrote: »
    Please don't forget, I'm also having to select a figure which we can project across the next quarter century.

    Make your mind up. Is it historic or future rates you are trying to predict. Just how long are people meant to wait for the crash. Sometime between 2000 & 2023?
  • Pimperne1
    Pimperne1 Posts: 2,177 Forumite
    edited 1 August 2011 at 8:28PM
    geneer wrote: »
    No probs.
    http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/graphs-base-rate-uk.php

    SVRs range between 9% to 5%, outside of the unprecedented emergency base rate blips of the last couple of years.

    Please don't forget, I'm also having to select a figure which we can project across the next quarter century.

    Now its your turn....



    True. But its not going to be mortgage rates lower than base rates.

    Ha, ha. Sorry, I was having a rest but that's beyond funny.

    Geneer is using the HPC table where they have simply added 2% onto the base rate every month for the last 14 years as being the authoritative source for the Typical Variable Mortgage Rate. Looks like an Excel formula used to populate that cell.

    Great research Geneer. :rotfl:

    Incidentally the argument is flawed in concentrating on SVRs. I have had loads of mortgages and they are hardly ever on SVR - can't be bothered doing the research but I expect you will find that the mortgage tarts were continually swapping one fix for another or one tracker for another.
  • nearlynew
    nearlynew Posts: 3,800 Forumite
    I don't care what the land registry or any other organisation says. I would rather trust my own eyes and ears.

    I know house prices have been falling for a long time and will continue to do so for a long time.
    "The problem with quotes on the internet is that you never know whether they are genuine or not" -
    Albert Einstein
  • robmatic
    robmatic Posts: 1,217 Forumite
    geneer wrote: »
    No, you haven't. You've simply dismissed it.
    For no logical reason I can determine.

    Because it has no basis in fact.
    geneer wrote: »

    Please enlight us as to what you consider real world numbers and factors.

    Since we've clearly demonstrated that you cannot be refering to a financial benefit, you must be refering to intangible subjective benefits. Which, in all honest, isn't that interesting.

    Nope, I am referring to a financial benefit. For example: paying a mortgage rate of BBR + 0.5% vs. paying rent at 5% or more of a property's value; or, the value of a debt being eroded in real terms by inflation.
    geneer wrote: »

    Except financially the benefits are pretty clear cut.
    Whether you go with my approximate sums, which you seem to disagree with, or Hamishes impossible sums.

    They are only clear cut if you completely discount any factor which may weigh against them. This is a curious method of analysis.
  • robmatic
    robmatic Posts: 1,217 Forumite
    geneer wrote: »
    No probs.
    http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/graphs-base-rate-uk.php

    SVRs range between 9% to 5%, outside of the unprecedented emergency base rate blips of the last couple of years.

    It's interesting that you can look at that table and determine that over the last 11 years the typical mortgage rate has been 7.5%. And that's notwithstanding the fact that SVRs would tend to be more expensive over that period than a tracker, a discount tracker (by definition!) or a fix.

    geneer wrote: »

    True. But its not going to be mortgage rates lower than base rates.

    There were mortgage products available pre-Crunch which tracked below base rate.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454.3K Spending & Discounts
  • 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 601K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.5K Life & Family
  • 259.1K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.