Land Registry - November +0.30% mom -1.9% yoy

DervProf

geneer wrote: »

Well a picture paints a thousand words.



Lordy. Theres quite a lot of the country stagnating at between -4 and -10%.

I don't know about painting a thousand words, but that picture tells a different story to many of the tales I read here, or are told by some of those in the media.

Looks like the majority of the country has seen falls, and that some areas have seen more than slight falls.

pbouk

Sibley wrote: »

Not where I live.

Are you from oop north?

Talk to me about London and SE.

London figures are masked by the richer areas which have some of the highest house prices in the world! i suspect you do not live anywhere near the premiership footballers and russian oligarchs.

chucknorris

geneer wrote: »

Oh. Is it worth pointing out that land reg says house prices are currently below Q3 2003 levels.

GO BULLS!

I'm not sure about the rest of the country but I can assure you that London prices are way above 2003 and that goes for Dorking (Surrey) too where we live.

geneer

ukcarper wrote: »

Where does it say that

See what you need to do is compare prices now against what they were in the past. All very technical i know.

geneer

chucknorris wrote: »

I'm not sure about the rest of the country but I can assure you that London prices are way above 2003 and that goes for Dorking (Surrey) too where we live.

So what?.....

Rinoa

chucknorris wrote: »

I'm not sure about the rest of the country but I can assure you that London prices are way above 2003 and that goes for Dorking (Surrey) too where we live.

Although geneer has been posting on HPC type forums for 6 years, he's never understood the stats. If he had he would know LR completely changed their methodology and introduced a new index based on repeat sales regression from mid 2006.

However, for a few months late in 2006 both indices were published, the new index averaging around £30,000 less than the old version.

Geneer is now comparing the 2 different indices and claiming house prices are below Q3 2003 levels. Is it any wonder no one believes anything he ever says?

chucknorris

geneer wrote: »

So what?.....

So we haven't lost about 500k of equity, that's what.

chucknorris

Rinoa wrote: »

Although geneer has been posting on HPC type forums for 6 years, he's never understood the stats. If he had he would know LR completely changed their methodology and introduced a new index based on repeat sales regression from mid 2006.

However, for a few months late in 2006 both indices were published, the new index averaging around £30,000 less than the old version.

Geneer is now comparing the 2 different indices and claiming house prices are below Q3 2003 levels. Is it any wonder no one believes anything he ever says?

I know for a fact that London prices and around Dorking have not dropped anywhere near that much. Whilst I admit I have little knowledge of other areas I would be surprised if on average prices had fallen that much.

Thanks for the explanation, I did wonder why he had claimed what appears to be such a large fall on average.

geneer

chucknorris wrote: »

So we haven't lost about 500k of equity, that's what.

so what?.....

geneer

Rinoa wrote: »

Although geneer has been posting on HPC type forums for 6 years, he's never understood the stats. If he had he would know LR completely changed their methodology and introduced a new index based on repeat sales regression from mid 2006.

However, for a few months late in 2006 both indices were published, the new index averaging around £30,000 less than the old version.

Geneer is now comparing the 2 different indices and claiming house prices are below Q3 2003 levels. Is it any wonder no one believes anything he ever says?

Oh dear. Only all the way back to Q3 2004 then.
You got me good.

GO BULLS! :T