Nationwide- +0.8% MoM +3.9% YoY

IveSeenTheLight

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I'm certainly not having a go, just telling it how it is. If you take offence from that, then I apologise, but it IS how it is. The majority who are pro HPI including yourself are either landlords or have multiple houses on this forum. Yourself being a landlord. ISTL, landlord, Hamish, mutliple owner, Wotsthat multiple owner and so on....

Graham,
You've got it wrong again with myself. I really wish you would stop stating my position as you invariably have misunderstood or wish to stereotype as in this instance.

I have stated before, I'm happy for inflation linked HPI.
I'm not advocating rampant HPI.

I am however a realist and have hedged my children and my position against greater than inflation increased as we are seeing now and as we have seen on average across the last 30 years

IveSeenTheLight

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I did state greed has built everything we have though. There has to be some greed in the economy to get things done. But in terms of landlords, the money doesn't circulate through the economy or benefit anyone but the landlord themselves.

Do you believe that LL's hoard the profits?

My response would be that they are not.

They are either re-investing the profits, increasing businesses who are affected by that re-investment.

Or

They are spending those profits. i.e. My family and I just enjoyed a week out at Centreparcs where we spent a considerable amount of money of the holiday, restaurants, activities etc. this all helps those businesses and the employment they provide

chucknorris

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Graham,
You've got it wrong again with myself. I really wish you would stop stating my position as you invariably have misunderstood or wish to stereotype as in this instance.

I have stated before, I'm happy for inflation linked HPI.
I'm not advocating rampant HPI.

I am however a realist and have hedged my children and my position against greater than inflation increased as we are seeing now and as we have seen on average across the last 30 years

I'll certainly take inflation linked HPI too. It is a nice bonus on the very good net yield that I am achieving (mainly due to having tracker mortgages and enjoying a low mortgage rate).

mystic_trev

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I am however a realist and have hedged my children

I suppose that's something different for them to do in the School Holidays! :rotfl:

92203

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

In terms of property, affordability really needs to be assess against the costs of servicing the finance on the property.
Statistically, properties are historically more affordable now when compared to the last 30 year average.

Lies, damned lies, and statistics!

As someone with a 20% deposit and ready to buy (though would rather wait until I have a >25% deposit), could you elaborate on the situation below please?

How will it cost less per month to buy a house at £110k, than it would to have bought it for £40k in 2001. 10% deposit in both instances.

At 2001 prices, it would have been possible to get a mortgage for that place on minimum wage.

Come 2012, you'd need to be on £25K+ to get a mortgage for the same place - Double the current min wage!

This is a real life situation, concerning a house I was looking at buying recently. Fully scoped it out on Land Reg/Zoopla.

System

inb4 definition of what affordability is.

chucknorris

92203 wrote: »

Lies, damned lies, and statistics!

As someone with a 20% deposit and ready to buy (though would rather wait until I have a >25% deposit), could you elaborate on the situation below please?

How will it cost less per month to buy a house at £110k, than it would to have bought it for £40k in 2001. 10% deposit in both instances.

At 2001 prices, it would have been possible to get a mortgage for that place on minimum wage.

Come 2012, you'd need to be on £25K+ to get a mortgage for the same place - Double the current min wage!

This is a real life situation, concerning a house I was looking at buying recently. Fully scoped it out on Land Reg/Zoopla.

That is 175% inflation, the UK average Halifax indices for 2Q 2001 and 2Q 2013 are 300.7 and 535.5 which is only 78% ( Nationwide is 174.4 and 333.7 so 91%) so your example is quite extreme and certainly not representative of the average increase in price for that period.

EDIT: You expect people on minimum wages to be able to buy houses?

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Its mostly landlords against everyone else on here now though.

Those who have the most want more. Simple as that.

It's just greed, BUT, that's how everything we have has been built.

House prices rise by a sniff more than inflation for the first time since 2007 and you're waffling about greed, landlords & estate agents.

Another economic story being used as a stepping stone to the moral high ground.

ukcarper

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Your looking at it too simplistically and in reality, this is not what we are seeing.

According to the CML's latest statistical release42% more first-time buyers in May than a year ago
Lending to first-time buyers, home movers and remortgagors all increased in May, with a particularly marked increase in lending to first-time buyers, according to the latest Regulated Mortgage Survey data published today by the Council of Mortgage Lenders.

First-time buyers

The number of mortgages to first-time buyers in May reached 25,100 - 29% higher than in April, and 42% higher than in May last year. First-time buyers accounted for 45% of all loans for house purchase, similar to the levels of the past few months but considerably higher than the 38% seen on average since 2007.

The number of first-time buyer loans was the highest monthly figure since late 2007, and a marked contrast to the low point of just 8,500 loans in January 2009. By value, first-time buyer lending reached £3.4 billion in May, up from £2.5 billion in April and £2.2 billion in May last year.

For some months, there has been an increase in the number of first-time buyers entering the market with smaller deposits - this has now resulted in a shift in the average first-time buyer loan-to-value ratio rising to 83%, up from 81% in April and the highest ratio since November 2008. First-time buyers are also typically borrowing more (£113,400 in May, on average, compared with £110,000 in April and £105,000 in May last year), and typically now have higher incomes (£35,700 in May, up from £33,500 in May last year). The age of the typical first-time buyer remained at 29.

I don't think that proves anything other than there are more FTB. It is fairly obvious that if you can borrow say 4x joint income the lower the house price the more people will be able to get a big enough mortgage to buy.

92203

chucknorris wrote: »

EDIT: You expect people on minimum wages to be able to buy houses?

If house prices weren't so silly, yes. Why should someone on a low minimum wage be excluded from being able to pay a mortgage, safe in the knowledge that when they retire, they can live free of rent.

When I was a part time shelf stacker (while at uni) back in 2001, there were plenty of people who bought their own houses, which back then were much cheaper.

I even dated a care assistant who owned her own place. Cost her 30k, with a 10% deposit, which she saved over a year whilst living with her mum. I can provide you with a zoopla link to the house in question if you don't believe me...