Halifax -0.4%.... £159,486

Thrugelmir

StevieJ wrote: »

Just had a look at Zoopla, prices near me are up 4% since yesterday is that a joke site or what?

I improved the price of my property on Zoopla by 9% by registering some improvements. :beer:

Still less than we paid for the property in 2007 though.

wotsthat

homelessskilledworker wrote: »

Then(in my opinion) we are going to start chasing the £140k levels again, and when that happens the real acceptance of problems ahead can start being discussed on this board.

What I see as one of problems is that too many worry about a MoM fall of 0.4% (or what Sibley might think) than the cost of housing. You'd have to extrapolate another three years at these rates to get to your predicted price. It's great news for potential buyers living with parents but for a renter needing/ wanting for a crash it's neither here nor there - taking a step back I'd be asking if it was worth the wait especially if my VI area was up in price YoY.

I'll take a 0.4% fall in prices every month for three years - what's the alternative? Rent and have a reduced net worth in three years?

dinofabio

The stats can be manipulated to suit.

A lot of areas are static or maybe having slight increases but the big falls in some parts of the country are skewing the average downwards.

Good housing stock has weathered the storm in most areas.

Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu

chewmylegoff wrote: »

he might be better off staying put - and he obviously wouldn't be able to get the £195k mortgage unless he could demonstrate that he could put up the necessary deposit and afford the repayments on the increased mortgage.

but your point was that falling prices makes it easier to climb up to the next rung of the ladder, which is untrue for people who are buying with a mortgage because price falls wipe out the equity that you need for a deposit.

perhaps you were just trolling when you wrote that...

Sorry if you feel that way. For my part, I refuse to get into discussions where the 'proof' is a highly dubious mathematical example that is skewed to the opponent position's argument. As I said in my retort, if the example guy spends 5 years in his house and is so destitute that he is unable to save up to increase his deposit on the next house then he really shouldn't be moving up the ladder.

In the real world, if house prices were falling and you wanted to take advantage of it (or just ensure that you don't fall into negative equity) then you would save like mad to increase the deposit on the next place or to overpay on your current one.

Once the deposit requirements are out of the way, it's far better to have a lower mortgage than a higher one and in your example, the 25% gain as opposed to the 25% loss leaves the test guy with a mountain of a mortgage that would cost him tens of thousands more to service over the lifetime of the mortgage.

With a 25% fall, the difference in price between his current house and the new one he is buying is £75k. With 25% HPI the difference is £125k. At a conservative 5% interest rate, the HPC mortgage would cost him an extra £312 per month above his existing mortgage. The HPI mortgage would cost him £520 per month.

homelessskilledworker

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_cat_bounce


Since the collapse of 2007 it is now looking like we are going to get the classic dead cat bounce. Falls then followed by a sucker short revival followed by falls again.

Some people never learn

Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu

homelessskilledworker wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_cat_bounce


Since the collapse of 2007 it is now looking like we are going to get the classic dead cat bounce. Falls then followed by a sucker short revival followed by falls again.

Some people never learn

Learn what?

homelessskilledworker

Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu wrote: »

Learn what?

There are a handful of posters on here that advocate on a daily basis that we had a crisis in 2007(we all except that), prices fell and since 2009/2010 the falls ended and started to slightly recover
Halifax only have a few more thousand quid to go before the dead cat bounce gains vanish and we start seeing the falls continue from 2009/2010 levels.
Whether the Nationwide and LR follow suit remains to be seen, I think they will.

Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu

homelessskilledworker wrote: »

There are a handful of posters on here that advocate on a daily basis that we had a crisis in 2007(we all except that), prices fell and since 2009/2010 the falls ended and started to slightly recover
Halifax only have a few more thousand quid to go before the dead cat bounce gains vanish and we start seeing the falls continue from 2009/2010 levels.
Whether the Nationwide and LR follow suit remains to be seen, I think they will.

Doesn't the Halifax cover mainly the North of England? Do these handful of posters all live in the North of England?

wotsthat

homelessskilledworker wrote: »

Some people never learn

I know - it's like some people just have closed minds.

homelessskilledworker

Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu wrote: »

Doesn't the Halifax cover mainly the North of England? Do these handful of posters all live in the North of England?

Yes the Halifax has a northern bias, thats why I stress that when it comes to going sub £150k or showing a clear downward trend then the Halifax will be first followed by the LR and then the Nationwide.

But who knows, something might happen within the economy that effects the south east in the future. There was a time when the Halifax showed the highest property average price.