Bad news for homeowners as house prices will not return to pre-recession peak until e

Rinoa

homelessskilledworker wrote: »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2255765/Bad-news-homeowners-house-prices-return-pre-recession-peak-end-decade.html



House prices in Britain will not return to their pre-recession peak until the end of the decade, making this the longest slump in the property market since records began.
A report by a leading estate agent said the price of the average home peaked at £183,959 in 2007 but has fallen so dramatically it will not return to this level until 2019.
The 12-year recovery period could be the longest since records began in the 1950s.
The report said that once the impact of inflation is stripped out, average prices will not return to 2007 levels until 2031 – an incredible 24 years after they peaked

Shouting is clearly a sign of desperation.

IveSeenTheLight

homelessskilledworker wrote: »

the price of the average home peaked at £183,959 in 2007

I've been saying for a long time that people need to understand regional variances and that consumers should look carefully at their very local data for the property in question.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/898381

Whilst the average may be lower, some areas are above their "2007 peak"

the_flying_pig

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I've been saying for a long time that people need to understand regional variances and that consumers should look carefully at their very local data for the property in question.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/898381

Whilst the average may be lower, some areas are above their "2007 peak"

true enough, but of course this is only possible if other areas have taken a bigger than average hit below their 2007 peak. an average is precisely that, an average. it's not a 'worst possible case'.

taking the '15% below peak' quoted in the article, & imagining the country was divided into three areas [A-C], each with an equal number of houses/transactions, the following are ways to get an average of -15% [from peak].

• A,B,C all down 15%;
• A and B both down 25%, C up 5%;
• A down 55%, B flat, C up 10%;
• etc.

you do not get an average of 15% down from a HAMISH-style 'A down 15%, B flat, C up 10%'. A pattern like this would give an average of less than 2% down.

System

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I've been saying for a long time that people need to understand regional variances and that consumers should look carefully at their very local data for the property in question.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/898381

Whilst the average may be lower, some areas are above their "2007 peak"

Hmm, just tried to check mine again and Land Registry seem to have crapified their search, you can only drill down to whole counties now, unless I'm missing something.

You used to be able to put in a postcode.

wotsthat

Joeskeppi wrote: »

Hmm, just tried to check mine again and Land Registry seem to have crapified their search, you can only drill down to whole counties now, unless I'm missing something.

I just had a look too - can't seem to get indexed prices by postcode anymore.

The whole site does seem to be less than intuitive.

quotememiserable

The Daily Mail have an obsession with the idea that house price inflation is good while all other inflation is bad.
Good news for television owners today as prices of 37" LCDs double. I doubt they'd print that one.

NEO72

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

I can't see that it matters that much to the ordinary homeowner (unless they are in negative equity).

If I sell my house and buy another, then I will buy into the same market, so it won't make any difference as the slump will affect the prices of both properties.

No in fact its very good news as the cost of upsizing, which I would like to do at some point, is reduced. Of course the bit in brackets is I suspect the reason that it does very much matter to certain posters - naming no names [STRIKE]Hamish, Sibley, Pricklepants et al[/STRIKE]

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

NEO72 wrote: »

No in fact its very good news as the cost of upsizing, which I would like to do at some point, is reduced. Of course the bit in brackets is I suspect the reason that it does very much matter to certain posters - naming no names [STRIKE]Hamish, Sibley, Pricklepants et al[/STRIKE]

:rotfl:

House prices would need to fall by 80% for me to be in negative equity.

Nice try though.

Mr._Pricklepants

I'd have to take out a mortgage to be in any kind of equity. :rotfl:

wymondham

BertieUK wrote: »

I think that house prices over the past thirty years did become so unrealistic that it was getting to be silly prices at the end of the day.

Who do you think was to blame for this?

you can only blame the person buying - obviously they thought the price was 'correct'?