Home ownership back to 1988 levels.....

Jimmy_31

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

No Shortchanged, a housing shortage has created the problems we have now.

And preventing millions of people from owning by restricting lending is not going to help them.

Its helping me, and thousands upon thousands of others like me.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

shortchanged wrote: »

So why are there so few house sales now compared with say 2006 - 2007?

Because mortgage rationing is forcing a generation of young people to enrich their landlords instead of themselves.

If prices were the problem, then more people would be able to buy now than were able to buy in 2007. Obviously, both prices and interest rates are lower now than they were then. Yet less than half the number of people that could buy then, can buy now.

Mortgage rationing has prevented over a million people from buying since 2007 and that number is increasing rapidly every month.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Rinoa wrote: »

Lower prices aren't much use to aspiring FTB's if tight lending practices prevent them from buying.

Exactly.

You've converted a situation where a few hundred thousand people were priced out into a situation where a few million people are excluded from owning via mortgage rationing.

Anyone that thinks this is an improvement is clearly stark raving bonkers.

Jimmy_31

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Because mortgage rationing is forcing a generation of young people to enrich their landlords instead of themselves.

If prices were the problem, then more people would be able to buy now than were able to buy in 2007. Obviously, both prices and interest rates are lower now than they were then. Yet less than half the number of people that could buy then, can buy now.

Mortgage rationing has prevented over a million people from buying since 2007.

Mortgage rationing has prevented over a million people from buying since 2007.................

But will help many more people buy in the years to come.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Jimmy_31 wrote: »

But will help many more people buy in the years to come.

No it won't. Only increased lending can do that.

The number of people in owner occupation is falling rapidly, we have reversed two decades of progress in that regard in just the last few years thanks to lending restrictions.

shortchanged_2

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Because mortgage rationing is forcing a generation of young people to enrich their landlords instead of themselves.

If prices were the problem, then more people would be able to buy now than were able to buy in 2007. Obviously, both prices and interest rates are lower now than they were then. Yet less than half the number of people that could buy then, can buy now.

Mortgage rationing has prevented over a million people from buying since 2007.

Look Hamish both points of view we share are right, it's just how do you solve the current problem.

Yes you can go down your road of continuing to lend large income multiples and have small deposits to continue to keep house prices as they are and yes I'm sure there would be an increase in sales.

Or

You keep lending tight (by this I mean 10%+ deposits are fine but no IO mortgages and strict income multiples) so house prices eventually have to fall to fill the void where the gap between how much the banks will lend to match up with the price of houses.
This will eventually affect BTL's because I can't imagine many BTL'ers wanting to enter the market with it in decline and not much prospect of high HPI. This for me is obviously a better long term plan for the UK housing market.

ukcarper

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

No it won't. Only increased lending can do that.

The number of people in owner occupation is falling rapidly, we have reversed two decades of progress in that regard in just the last few years thanks to lending restrictions.

I’m afraid Jimmy can’t relate to the areas of the country that are not so badly effected by the recession. Where I am houses are being sold and let out as soon as they are available. A house near me has just been sold and let out I don’t know what the actual sale price was but it was advertised at £210k lets say it sold for £200k. With a 10% deposit over 25 years the mortgage repayments at 4% would be £1014 a month it would cost about £1000 a month to rent. This is in an area where the median full time male earnings are over £40k and the median part time female earnings are just under £11k giving them an income of £3250 a month.

I’m not for or against BTL but I would much prefer to see property going to owner-occupiers.

Jimmy_31

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

No it won't. Only increased lending can do that.

The number of people in owner occupation is falling rapidly, we have reversed two decades of progress in that regard in just the last few years thanks to lending restrictions.

The amount of money that is available to be lent out by the banks will now go to more people now that prices are falling.

Jimmy_31

ukcarper wrote: »

I’m afraid Jimmy can’t relate to the areas of the country that are not so badly effected by the recession. Where I am houses are being sold and let out as soon as they are available. A house near me has just been sold and let out I don’t know what the actual sale price was but it was advertised at £210k lets say it sold for £200k. With a 10% deposit over 25 years the mortgage repayments at 4% would be £1014 a month it would cost about £1000 a month to rent. This is in an area where the median full time male earnings are over £40k and the median part time female earnings are just under £11k giving them an income of £3250 a month.

I’m not for or against BTL but I would much prefer to see property going to owner-occupiers.

Why cant i relate to that.

Im talking about the areas i live and work in.

Isnt that what you just did.

nickj_2

what will happen to all the people who are renting now and will never be able to afford their own home , when they retire , they are not going to be able to afford £1000pcm or whatever the price is , in another 20 or 30 years time