Nationwide -0.6%

the_flying_pig

I've reached a conclusion that QoQ [or thereabouts] changes are the most meaningful ones to look at.

MoM much too volatile & blighted by small samples.

YoY good quality data but too long-term to pick up what can easily be real changes.

So where are we QoQ with Nationwide? about -0.3%? In other words very, very slow falls.

joguest

Sibley wrote: »

It's funny. My mortgage payment didn't go up today.
I'm still happy.:rotfl:

I'm prepared to bet that the price of butter is going up faster than your wages though, so the percentage of your net monthly wages available to service your mortgage is diminishing. When general price inflation outstrips wage inflation then mortgage holders will struggle to service their mortgages to a greater extent.

Graham_Devon

Bit boring this thread.

Would have been a bit more exciting if they had risen. Would be on page 5 now, with the party raging and the self congratulations brigade bouncing off each others posts about how right they were.

Ho hum. Back to work I guess.

joguest

Here's a graph I drew earlier:

(All NSA, LR shifted back a couple of months)

Prices are still sliding slowly. This summer's peak in tha Nationwide is ~1% lower than 2010. In reality, London is masking the larger falls happening across the rest of the country (around 9% fall in the north-east over the last 12 months according to the LR). However, there are signs of things in London starting to change over recent months (In addition, I wonder what effect the riots have had on the confidence of foreign investors?).

I think (for what it's worth) the Nationwide will fall to a lower seasonal trough this winter than last year.

Caveat_Mortgagor

Batchy wrote: »

Aug 10 166,507
Aug 11 165,914

So I could have brought my house cheaper all be it only £593 ... however, could I have paid around £4k off my mortgage while renting in the same period, and reduced my mortgage by another year? I have eaten into my mortgage period, reduced my Debt, and lived in a lovely home, had plenty to do doing it up how I wanted it, and have a house worth more than it was purchased for as a result.

Instead of having to pay 213k from the start of a new mortgage I only have 204k left to pay, ive made 9k worth of progress on my mortgage payments. Instead people pay rent, and then say well I saved 5k waiting 12 months... well you havent, cause you had to live somewhere and probably paid around 8-9k for the equivalent house in rent, moving costs, etc... and your now starting from fresh/scratch. ie, 213k and 25 years less £593 quid for the average house decrease from 12 months ago.

The mistake you have made is to assume that what happens to the average figure represents whats hapened to your individual house. Unfortunately, the average this month is based on different houses to last month, so it isnt that straightforward.

I'll give an extreme example to demonstrate the point.

Only 3 houses sell in a particualr time period. £1m, £400k and £100k. Average price is £500k.

In the next report, the same houses are for sale, but only the two most expensive ones sell. However, they sell at 10% off the previous price. ie £900k and £360k.

The average price is now £630k. Does that mean that all houses are now more than 20% more valuable?

It is a fact that the upper end of the market has been more bouyant over the last 4 years. The bottom end of the market was much more severly hit than the top, so when average prices fluctaute, you need to be aware that the definition of the average house as changed as well as the price.

The numbers you quoted assume that your house has lost £583. That might be the case if you have moved it to a nicer location and added 20 square feet or so of extra floor space...... cos thats whats happened to the average house that Nationwide customers are looking at!

Generali

Caveat_Mortgagor wrote: »

The mistake you have made is to assume that what happens to the average figure represents whats hapened to your individual house. Unfortunately, the average this month is based on different houses to last month, so it isnt that straightforward.

I'll give an extreme example to demonstrate the point.

Only 3 houses sell in a particualr time period. £1m, £400k and £100k. Average price is £500k.

In the next report, the same houses are for sale, but only the two most expensive ones sell. However, they sell at 10% off the previous price. ie £900k and £360k.

The average price is now £630k. Does that mean that all houses are now more than 20% more valuable?

It is a fact that the upper end of the market has been more bouyant over the last 4 years. The bottom end of the market was much more severly hit than the top, so when average prices fluctaute, you need to be aware that the definition of the average house as changed as well as the price.

The numbers you quoted assume that your house has lost £583. That might be the case if you have moved it to a nicer location and added 20 square feet or so of extra floor space...... cos thats whats happened to the average house that Nationwide customers are looking at!

Nationwide 'mix adjust' their sample to overcome this. 2 bed terrace house prices at time 1 are compared with 2 bed terrace house prices at time 2 for example. The don't just apply a simple average across sales:

http://www.nationwide.co.uk/hpi/method_qs.htm

Nationwide house prices are mix adjusted - i.e. we track a representative house price over time rather than the simple average price. We do not use the simple average price (Land Registry uses this method) because it is too easily influenced by a change in the mix (i.e. proportion of different property types, locations etc) of houses

angrypirate

Sibley wrote: »

It's funny. My mortgage payment didn't go up today.
I'm still happy.:rotfl:

Thats weird. I dont recall anyone asking and I dont expect anyone cares. Considering you are constantly predicting HPI to take off, I'd suggest you shut up on the back of this mornings press release

FTBFun

DervProf wrote: »

I am aware that there have been a small number of people who have predicted very large falls, but I assume most of these people have now realised that their predictions are not likely to come to fruition. I just wondered if any current or past members of this forum have made these predictions.

Post no.5?

Graham_Devon

Sandwich Update:

Due to frivilously splashing the cash when the land registry figures release made me richer overnight, I'm now going to have to cut my cloth accordingly now I'm considerably poorer overnight.

Suggestions?

I'm thinking value chicken liver paste.

doire_2

Batchy wrote: »

Aug 10 166,507
Aug 11 165,914

So I could have brought my house cheaper all be it only £593 ... however, could I have paid around £4k off my mortgage while renting in the same period, and reduced my mortgage by another year? I have eaten into my mortgage period, reduced my Debt, and lived in a lovely home, had plenty to do doing it up how I wanted it, and have a house worth more than it was purchased for as a result.

Instead of having to pay 213k from the start of a new mortgage I only have 204k left to pay, ive made 9k worth of progress on my mortgage payments. Instead people pay rent, and then say well I saved 5k waiting 12 months... well you havent, cause you had to live somewhere and probably paid around 8-9k for the equivalent house in rent, moving costs, etc... and your now starting from fresh/scratch. ie, 213k and 25 years less £593 quid for the average house decrease from 12 months ago.

Ifs, buts, and could haves...heres another what if someone bought and house and something happened to it 6 months down the line and needed 20k spent on it to fix it. If people are happy to wait for further falls then let them

As for your 10 year fix for 3.99%. That requires a 30% deposit which you forgot to mention