When will the correction come to house prices?

Bubble_and_Squeak

danothy wrote: »

I guess my point is still "Are you sure about that? Have you actually checked?". Because if you look at London sale prices for those months, or even just inner London there is still no "the" peak in April:



The fact is that houses have sold for more than they did in April of this year since April. That is true across the UK and specifically in London. If you called the peak in April then it seems you called it wrong ...

LR is a lagging indicator.
i'm guessing its 3-5 months behind the curve.
that would make the latest figures representative of march/april ish.
but thats a monster ish.

danothy

Bubble_and_Squeak wrote: »

LR is a lagging indicator.
i'm guessing its 3-5 months behind the curve.
that would make the latest figures representative of march/april ish.
but thats a monster ish.

You're wrong. It's clear that you have misunderstood the lag aspect of the records somewhat. The price paid data recorded by the Land Registry are recorded with the completion date of the sale, i.e. if a sale price is recorded as April then the sale completed in April.

The lag is due to the time it takes to report and record all the sales. This means that there is a delay between the actual sales in a given month and knowing what those sales are for that month. Distinctly this doesn't mean that sales recorded as occurring in a given month pertain to some other month. Taking time to aggregate the sales data and look back over it is not the same as time shifting the data.

System

Bubble_and_Squeak wrote: »

i gave up trying to buy in april
since then supply has increased, asking prices have fallen and less houses are achieving the asking price.
where did i go wrong?

I'm not talking about when you "gave up". I'm talking about when you could have bought. September 2013 (according to your posts) apparently you were looking, should have bought then, that's £70,000 up the swanny. You probably could have bought a lot sooner.

Picking a peak date and declaring you've saved since then is a bit of an HPC tactic for the morons.

And then you can chuck your rent on top. Perhaps wotsthat will make you a spreadsheet.

Bubble_and_Squeak

Joeskeppi wrote: »

I'm not talking about when you "gave up". I'm talking about when you could have bought. September 2013 (according to your posts) apparently you were looking, should have bought then, that's £70,000 up the swanny. You probably could have bought a lot sooner.

Picking a peak date and declaring you've saved since then is a bit of an HPC tactic for the morons.

And then you can chuck your rent on top. Perhaps wotsthat will make you a spreadsheet.

now now joe no need to get offensive
i know i should have bought in 2013
but we mustn't dwell on the past
we must look to the future and what it may bring
and if we look at the housing market today we see downward pressure on prices

Bubble_and_Squeak

danothy wrote: »

You're wrong. It's clear that you have misunderstood the lag aspect of the records somewhat. The price paid data recorded by the Land Registry are recorded with the completion date of the sale, i.e. if a sale price is recorded as April then the sale completed in April.

The lag is due to the time it takes to report and record all the sales. This means that there is a delay between the actual sales in a given month and knowing what those sales are for that month. Distinctly this doesn't mean that sales recorded as occurring in a given month pertain to some other month. Taking time to aggregate the sales data and look back over it is not the same as time shifting the data.

well well well.
i've been wrong all these years.
i thought that a sale agreed in april would take several months to go through the motions and would complete sometime around july.
thanks for putting me straight on that one!

danothy

Bubble_and_Squeak wrote: »

well well well.
i've been wrong all these years.
i thought that a sale agreed in april would take several months to go through the motions and would complete sometime around july.
thanks for putting me straight on that one!

It most likely would, and even those completed in April would take some time for the information to filter through to the Land Registry records (the lag), but they are still recorded as having occurred in April, hence April's figures are not "the" peak as demonstrated by the actual sale prices since April.

gbsilp

danothy wrote: »

It most likely would, and even those completed in April would take some time for the information to filter through to the Land Registry records (the lag), but they are still recorded as having occurred in April, hence April's figures are not "the" peak as demonstrated by the actual sale prices since April.

So the LR go back and update the April figure as more and more information on completed sales ocurring in April filters through?

danothy

gbsilp wrote: »

So the LR go back and update the April figure as more and more information on completed sales ocurring in April filters through?

It appears so, the monthly file they release has a signifier by each record that identifies it as an addition, deletion, or change to a previously published record.

Interestingly (or maybe not), the most recent monthly file (July 2014 data) has alterations, deletions, and additions going back as far as 1995 (I presume ongoing corrections when they come to light etc.), but over 90% of the data in that file are additions for sales completing in May, June, and July. There's about 3.5k sales from April 2014 that took that long to filter through, which is about 5% of the total sales for that month that have been reported so far. So crudely, it seems about 95% of the sales for a month come through within about 3 months of the sale.

Jason74

danothy wrote: »

It most likely would, and even those completed in April would take some time for the information to filter through to the Land Registry records (the lag), but they are still recorded as having occurred in April, hence April's figures are not "the" peak as demonstrated by the actual sale prices since April.

To be fair, I think that you and Bubble could be talking at cross purposes here. Certainly, your explanation is the correct one from the technical point of view. But, where Bubble also has a point, is that LR for July will reflect sales agreed in April or thereabouts. So if we take time of sale as being the sale agreed date (as Bubble seems to be doing), it is quite possible that April was the time that prices were at their highest in terms of sales being agreed. Land registry hitting a high in July would actually support that assertion rather than undermining it.


Of course, if LR continues to rise in the coming Months, Bubble's assertion will be proved wrong, but at this stage, the Jury's still out on that one.

Bubble_and_Squeak

Jason74 wrote: »

To be fair, I think that you and Bubble could be talking at cross purposes here. Certainly, your explanation is the correct one from the technical point of view. But, where Bubble also has a point, is that LR for July will reflect sales agreed in April or thereabouts. So if we take time of sale as being the sale agreed date (as Bubble seems to be doing), it is quite possible that April was the time that prices were at their highest in terms of sales being agreed. Land registry hitting a high in July would actually support that assertion rather than undermining it.


Of course, if LR continues to rise in the coming Months, Bubble's assertion will be proved wrong, but at this stage, the Jury's still out on that one.

not necessarily.
i may have merely misjudged the time lag factor.
although, looking at those charts it does seem to be a 3 month lag.
if we take the dip as december the chart seems to mirror exactly what i was seeing on the ground for the first 4 months of this year.