House prices rising in uk

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

mrandmrswilliams wrote: »

Rents have shot up where we are too

Yes, rents are more expensive than a mortgage in around 90% of the UK now, and that's even with mortgage rates of 5%, not some mythical 0.5% rate some posters like to claim.

Such a shame the young of today are being forced to enrich their landlords due to mortgage rationing.

shortchanged_2

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Such a shame the young of today are being forced to enrich their landlords due to mortgage rationing.

Wrap up with your psuedo concern for FTB's Hamish. You've got nothing more than a motive to ramp up house prices for your own benefit.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

shortchanged wrote: »

Wrap up with your psuedo concern for FTB's Hamish. You've got nothing more than a motive to ramp up house prices for your own benefit.

And you have nothing but a motive to ramp a crash for your own personal benefit.

However back in the real world, it is demonstrably the case that lower prices have not enabled more FTB-s to buy houses, as mortgage rationing is forcing them to enrich their landlords instead.

A situation you seem to revel in.

Very sad.:(

Thermidor

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Yes, rents are more expensive than a mortgage in around 90% of the UK now, and that's even with mortgage rates of 5%, not some mythical 0.5% rate some posters like to claim.

Such a shame the young of today are being forced to enrich their landlords due to mortgage rationing.

It's ironic that rents are dearer than a mortgage.

And rent's dead money too! You get nothing back at the end of it

zappahey

Can you people beggar off, back to the debate board where the rest of the nutters live

MatteH

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Yes, rents are more expensive than a mortgage in around 90% of the UK now, and that's even with mortgage rates of 5%, not some mythical 0.5% rate some posters like to claim.

Source of this 'info' please?

Thrugelmir

Thermidor wrote: »

It's ironic that rents are dearer than a mortgage.

If they weren't then there would seriously be something wrong in the market.

IcemanUK_2

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Yes, rents are more expensive than a mortgage in around 90% of the UK now, and that's even with mortgage rates of 5%, not some mythical 0.5% rate some posters like to claim.

Such a shame the young of today are being forced to enrich their landlords due to mortgage rationing.

Sweeping generalisations do not a market make.

In early 2009 I rented a 5 bed townhouse from my mate in Peterborough for £850 a month on the Hampton vale estate. This house was valued at 340k in 2007 by the way

We then moved as he wanted it back to just down the road where we are now renting a 4 bed detached with double garage, very nice house for £1000 a month

I would hardly call that soaring rents myself! Also please please find me a mortgage on this 4 bed detached in Hamton Vale for less than a grand a month and I will happily pay you the differnece upto the grand.

As an anecdote my mates house is now valued at around 280 although he has never had a viewing to my knowledge, a real loss of 60k and steadily going down albeit at a stagnating snails pace.

The country is broke
The people are skint
Houses are still overpriced to economic reality

High house prices benefit no one in the long run and are the death knell for any economy, all that money being wasted just to service massive loans and debt that could be spent shopping and on cars etc.

I will never understand why some people in the UK seem to think it a good idea to pay a lot for anything.

NEO72

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Yep.

"50% off by Xmas 2009" was a classic. :rotfl:

Anyway, back to topic.

The Nationwide index is now positive Year on Year. The Halifax Year on Year decline has halved in the last couple of months and is heading the same way. Only a matter of time til Land Registry catches up and goes positive.

There's now a reasonable prospect that this year will end up with prices flat or slightly positive on average. Similar to last year, and after the big gains of 2009.

In the meantime of course, rents have soared to new record highs and other than the usual couple of months of decline mid winter, there's no sign of this slowing any time soon.

And mortgage holders continue to take advantage of record low interest rates, saving themselves a fortune and cutting years off the mortgage.

The financial losses for renters (versus buying) since 2009 are now getting very large indeed..... On average of course.

And eve those who bought at absolute peak in 2007 have now broken even or gone positive versus renting, on average.

It very much looks like the last few years and the next few as well will turn out to be one of the best times in history to buy a house with a mortgage, and one of the worst to rent.

It seems you spend a lot of time here trying to convince people that now is a great time to buy - its almost as if you're trying to do your bit to boost sentiment or something....

I see you've zoomed in on a single month's rise from a single index. Lets look at this shall we? Firstly, NW has approx an 8% share of the mortgage market and almost half of transactions are cash, ergo these figures represent circa 4% of all transactions. Secondly, I'm sure that if the figures were negative, you'd be the first one proclaiming that single month's figures can't give you any meaningful insight - just statistical 'noise' if you like. Finally, as we've discussed NW figures are more representative of the London market than anwhere else (feel free to compare the London Land Reg figures with NW if you don't believe me). So the sample on which this is based is very small and biased towards London - I wouldn't be reading an awful lot into it and all other indices are showing a downward year-on-year trend (and that's with record low interest rates and flattered by the effect of London prices).

I see you also mention rents being at record highs. They were also at 'record highs' in 2008 until the a glut of 'accidental landlords' drove rents back down. Now these accidental landlords are having another bash at selling - I'm sure you know the amount of unsold stock is also at 'record highs' - but I'm sure when the penny drops and they can't achieve their fantasy valuation they'll be letting them out again = lower rents.

Of course in the meantime, the Local Housing Allowance which has underpinned rental prices is being cut drastically, although the full effects of this won't be felt until next year (much to the bemusement of all those 'savvy investors' pilling in now and wondering why they can't find a tenant for their overpriced 'investment').

And you talk about now being a good time to buy compared to renting. You forgot to mention that a hefty deposit (average is around 25%) is required to make it comparable. You also don't seem to take into account what the effect will be on prices when this finite pool of 'cash rich' buyers runs out - how many potential buyers do you know with 40K knocking around?.

Oh and as for those who bought in 2007 having done so well - forums such as this are filled with stories of families forced to stay in their overpriced homes because they cannot sell for less than they paid. Also, many of these are unable to remortgage to take advantage of these great rates you talk about as they have too little equity (if they have any at all). Oh and since we're on MSE, I feel I should mention the fact that the extra anyone paid buying at peak prices will effectively be doubled over the life of the mortgage when taking interest into account.

I eagerly await your response (and if past form is anything to go by, you will make a feeble attempt to counter one or two points whilst conveniently ignoring the others).

IcemanUK_2

NEO72 wrote: »

It seems you spend a lot of time here trying to convince people that now is a great time to buy - its almost as if you're trying to do your bit to boost sentiment or something....

I see you've zoomed in on a single month's rise from a single index. Lets look at this shall we? Firstly, NW has approx an 8% share of the mortgage market and almost half of transactions are cash, ergo these figures represent circa 4% of all transactions. Secondly, I'm sure that if the figures were negative, you'd be the first one proclaiming that single month's figures can't give you any meaningful insight - just statistical 'noise' if you like. Finally, as we've discussed NW figures are more representative of the London market than anwhere else (feel free to compare the London Land Reg figures with NW if you don't believe me). So the sample on which this is based is very small and biased towards London - I wouldn't be reading an awful lot into it and all other indices are showing a downward year-on-year trend (and that's with record low interest rates and flattered by the effect of London prices).

I see you also mention rents being at record highs. They were also at 'record highs' in 2008 until the a glut of 'accidental landlords' drove rents back down. Now these accidental landlords are having another bash at selling - I'm sure you know the amount of unsold stock is also at 'record highs' - but I'm sure when the penny drops and they can't achieve their fantasy valuation they'll be letting them out again = lower rents.

Of course in the meantime, the Local Housing Allowance which has underpinned rental prices is being cut drastically, although the full effects of this won't be felt until next year (much to the bemusement of all those 'savvy investors' pilling in now and wondering why they can't find a tenant for their overpriced 'investment').

And you talk about now being a good time to buy compared to renting. You forgot to mention that a hefty deposit (average is around 25%) is required to make it comparable. You also don't seem to take into account what the effect will be on prices when this finite pool of 'cash rich' buyers runs out - how many potential buyers do you know with 40K knocking around?.

Oh and as for those who bought in 2007 having done so well - forums such as this are filled with stories of families forced to stay in their overpriced homes because they cannot sell for less than they paid. Also, many of these are unable to remortgage to take advantage of these great rates you talk about as they have too little equity (if they have any at all). Oh and since we're on MSE, I feel I should mention the fact that the extra anyone paid buying at peak prices will effectively be doubled over the life of the mortgage when taking interest into account.

I eagerly await your response (and if past form is anything to go by, you will make a feeble attempt to counter one or two points whilst conveniently ignoring the others).

I could not have put that better myself so I wont even try