'We've reached a tipping point' Signs of house price weakness

saguk1234

Confusing luck with intelligence.

Crashy_Time

ukcarper wrote: »

Can you let us know some details about the 2 properties.

Very simply the claim I have often made on HPC of rent increasing £50 p.m over 17 years is based on the first flat I rented in Edinburgh at 350 p.m in 1997, and the flat I have now at 400 p.m. Both are similar (small, but the present one gets more light, is in better order and is generally nicer to live in, and the block is half empty which helps as well) That is the basis of my claim that rent has gone nowhere, and that BTL is basically subsidising renters to live cheaply.


The 7 year flat was slightly bigger than this one, yes, but for about four years the rent was also 400 p.m. The landlord announced that a landlords website had stated that the rent for that level of flat should be 450 p.m, not 400, and I duly paid up because the deal was just too good to let go.


The `97 flat only lasted about 6 months because I found a room in a bedsit for about 200 p.m, eventually graduating to "The Big room", which was massive, for about 230 p.m . This big room was probably about the same size as the first flat.


My shared flat/ house room rate probably stayed at under 300 p.m for a while, peaking with a room in a coach house with massive garden at about 330 p.m. I only realised Fred Goodwin stayed in the same street when I saw the police protection after the collapse/bailout saga.


So, 350 p.m 17 years ago, 450 p.m for a while two or three years ago, back down to 400 p.m now. Doesn`t sound like rising rents to me. Historical mortgage rates are what, 7 or 8%? The only way mortgage interest could be less than my rent over those years is because the average for the 17 year period has been pulled down by massive government intervention in the market?

Crashy_Time

ukcarper wrote: »

Not prepared to then.

Genuine question; Are you Autistic?

Crashy_Time

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn wrote: »

You're a complete imbecile, this is no indication of rents going down, this is only evidence of you moving home to somewhere cheaper. If I sell my house for 200k and buy another house for 100k does that indicate that houses are decreasing in value?

Please answer crashy :rotfl:

Do you think the average muppet piling into BTL in Edinburgh in 1997, and putting their flat on the rental market at 350 p.m then, thought that 17 years later they would only be able to bump up the price by £50 p.m? I know the pound has been devalued, but come on.

wotsthat

Crashy_Time wrote: »

How much did you pay in cash for your house if you don`t mind me asking?

I 'rented' a debt from a building society. Broad brush figures..

- I've been in this house for about the same time as your journey (a bit less)
- Average mortgage rate 4.34%
- I've paid £35,200 'rent' to the bank
- Another £2,600 in interest (and a few years) and I'll own outright
- I'm fixed to just about the end of the term so will be unaffected by rate rises
- This is for a 3 bed detached in the Midlands. Nothing special but would cost, at least, £250/ month more in rent than the mortgage.
- I've paid £9,700 in maintenance in this time.

So, in summary, I'll have paid £47,500 in interest & maintenance (plus the capital of course) and will own 100% of my house. A crash of 100% would still leave me £50k better off buying rather than waiting and hoping.

These are 'standard' calculations and worse case - I stoozed on 0% credit cards for a while and spent quite a few years with £20k offset against the mortgage that was 5.68% at the time. I offset cash savings as well. I didn't think it fair to include these because I withdrew the gains to put towards a holiday home after the crash.

By contrast you've paid £81k over the same time period and own 0% of nothing.

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn

Crashy_Time wrote: »

Very simply the claim I have often made on HPC of rent increasing £50 p.m over 17 years is based on the first flat I rented in Edinburgh at 350 p.m in 1997, and the flat I have now at 400 p.m. Both are similar (small, but the present one gets more light, is in better order and is generally nicer to live in, and the block is half empty which helps as well) That is the basis of my claim that rent has gone nowhere, and that BTL is basically subsidising renters to live cheaply.


The 7 year flat was slightly bigger than this one, yes, but for about four years the rent was also 400 p.m. The landlord announced that a landlords website had stated that the rent for that level of flat should be 450 p.m, not 400, and I duly paid up because the deal was just too good to let go.


The `97 flat only lasted about 6 months because I found a room in a bedsit for about 200 p.m, eventually graduating to "The Big room", which was massive, for about 230 p.m . This big room was probably about the same size as the first flat.


My shared flat/ house room rate probably stayed at under 300 p.m for a while, peaking with a room in a coach house with massive garden at about 330 p.m. I only realised Fred Goodwin stayed in the same street when I saw the police protection after the collapse/bailout saga.


So, 350 p.m 17 years ago, 450 p.m for a while two or three years ago, back down to 400 p.m now. Doesn`t sound like rising rents to me. Historical mortgage rates are what, 7 or 8%? The only way mortgage interest could be less than my rent over those years is because the average for the 17 year period has been pulled down by massive government intervention in the market?

And there's me thinking anecdotal evidence is not really evidence..... Smashed it out the park this time crashy.... How about we post average rent prices for you over a 17 yr span??

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn

Crashy_Time wrote: »

Do you think the average muppet piling into BTL in Edinburgh in 1997, and putting their flat on the rental market at 350 p.m then, thought that 17 years later they would only be able to bump up the price by £50 p.m? I know the pound has been devalued, but come on.

Not prepared to answer the question then crashy???

If I sell my house for 200k and buy another house for 100k does that indicate that houses are decreasing in value?

ukcarper

Crashy_Time wrote: »

Genuine question; Are you Autistic?

It's funny how your mate HPC-troll accuses people of being rude to him when you are one of the most obnoxious person on here.

Crashy_Time

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn wrote: »

Not prepared to answer the question then crashy???

If I sell my house for 200k and buy another house for 100k does that indicate that houses are decreasing in value?

You didn`t answer my original question; If you buy a house in a street for 200k, and a neighbour sells one exactly the same for 100k, is yours still worth 200k?

ukcarper

Crashy_Time wrote: »

Do you think the average muppet piling into BTL in Edinburgh in 1997, and putting their flat on the rental market at 350 p.m then, thought that 17 years later they would only be able to bump up the price by £50 p.m? I know the pound has been devalued, but come on.

Cheapest flat in Edinburg on rightmove is £460 a month.