Nationwide September -0.4%

Mr._Pricklepants

ukcarper wrote: »

You need to get to grip with average you could just as easily say they would be a lot less with the north taken out.

You could safely say there would be no falls at all with the north taken out.

Fella

Unless it's a 0.5% (or more) move in the same direction every month, any move of 0.5% or less in either direction really isn't news is it. By the time you factor in the margin of error it's meaningless.

mr_fishbulb

DervProf wrote: »

Probably.

I haven't visited HPC for quite a while, well not since the start of the crash anyway.

Don't worry, we always get told when they "are going mental over there"

Loughton_Monkey

Fella wrote: »

Unless it's a 0.5% (or more) move in the same direction every month, any move of 0.5% or less in either direction really isn't news is it. By the time you factor in the margin of error it's meaningless.

You know that.

I know that.

People who write meaningless house price drivel don't know that, and sadly don't understand it either. So it's probably like carving jelly to try and persuade them.

chewmylegoff

Mr._Pricklepants wrote: »

You could safely say there would be no falls at all with the north taken out.

You could do. Of course you would have to define "the north" to include the whole of the South west, Oxfordshire, cambridgeshire, the whole of East Anglia, Wales and the entirety of the midlands.

You would be able to do that 'safely' but people would probably laugh in your face.

Mr._Pricklepants

chewmylegoff wrote: »

You could do. Of course you would have to define "the north" to include the whole of the South west, Oxfordshire, cambridgeshire, the whole of East Anglia, Wales and the entirety of the midlands.

You would be able to do that 'safely' but people would probably laugh in your face.

No.
South West, Oxfordshire, Cambridgeshire, East Anglia and the entirety of the midlands all show positive YOY (latest LR figures)

Which kind of negates twit's point:

brit1234 wrote: »

These falls must be a lot bigger when you take London out of the figures.

angrypirate

A quick analysis of the NSA figures (its not that i dont trust the seasonal adjustment, i think it can make for interesting reading looking at the raw data), shows that in July, the monthly change was -0.81%, August was +0.21% and September -0.46.

I truely think that if you take out London numbers skewing the market, there would be some pretty bad figures.

DpchMd

So let's pretend my house has been impacted by the average 1.4% fall YoY.

It was worth around 210k a year ago which means it's now worth 207k. Gulp, I've just lost 3k

Mortgage is about 1k a month with about 300 quid interest pm inclusive. So not only have I lost 3k in value, but I've also lost 3.6k in interest bringing my total loss to 6.6k. Ouch.

But, if I was to have rented this property it'd still cost about a grand a month, so I would have "lost" 12k. So I'm very roughly 5.4k better off by buying, even though house prices have gone down.

Is that right? Have I screwed up somewhere?

Gin and tonics all round?

Generali

chewmylegoff wrote: »

You could do. Of course you would have to define "the north" to include the whole of the South west, Oxfordshire, cambridgeshire, the whole of East Anglia, Wales and the entirety of the midlands.

You would be able to do that 'safely' but people would probably laugh in your face.

It's north to me but then again so is Brisbane.

Loughton_Monkey

I glanced at the Regional figures and calculated the change from Q3 2011 to Q3 2012.

Total UK was -1.61%

Rather perversely "North" was in fact 0.01% UP.

But apart from the obvious disaster areas of the UK (Soctland, Wales, N. Ireland) only 2 regions underperformed the average UK. These were North West (-1.97%) and Yorks/Humberside (-2.01%)

In England, only the North West is showing negative growth over 3 years. Clearly this region is 'catching' something from Northern Ireland.