Properties with the biggest drops in prices

Crashy_Time

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn wrote: »

Remember, this poster has asserted that rental prices have gone down over the last 17 yrs, so you may want to take what she says with a pinch of salt.:rotfl:

No, I said my rent was 50 p.m MORE than 17 years ago. You have to get this stuff right if you want to have even a grain of credibility. Lying to justify your own situation just makes you look like a muppet.

thor

Rota wrote: »

Now look at where we are now. Unemployment is getting smaller by the day, GDP stronger by the day, people feeling more confident every day. As much as some people aren't getting them pay-rises are happening.

Sure you can find bad news in the papers but a rational person would see we aren't in 2008-9 anymore.

Yet we are not doing well enough for the boe rate to incease from its record all time low with deflation also knocking on the door.

Rota

thor wrote: »

Yet we are not doing well enough for the boe rate to incease from its record all time low with deflation also knocking on the door.

Its close though.

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn

Crashy_Time wrote: »

No, I said my rent was 50 p.m MORE than 17 years ago. You have to get this stuff right if you want to have even a grain of credibility. Lying to justify your own situation just makes you look like a muppet.

Hmmmmm let's see....

Crashy_Time wrote: »

If someone in your street sells for less than you paid, and the houses are similar, that is the new value of your house, you have no control over the process.


As my rent has not increased in 17 years I am not holding my breath for sudden increases any time soon. In fact I am pretty sure that if I continue to rent I will be DECREASING the payments..

One minute you've paid exactly £81,600 in rent. The next you say it's less.

Rents haven't increased in 17 years and then change of heart and you accept they've increased over 14%.

But then you tell us you actually moved to a HMO and it was more expensive and you couldn't afford to maintain your living standards....

Make your mind up CrashyMcTroll

Rota

In your 50's living in a share flat. That's aspirational

Crashy_Time

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn wrote: »

Hmmmmm let's see....



One minute you've paid exactly £81,600 in rent. The next you say it's less.

Rents haven't increased in 17 years and then change of heart and you accept they've increased over 14%.

But then you tell us you actually moved to a HMO and it was more expensive and you couldn't afford to maintain your living standards....

Make your mind up CrashyMcTroll

I have posted it on the other thread. The actual cost including rooms in shared flats is around 71k. Averages out at around 4k a year for housing. I am very comfortable sitting back and watching the crash from that batting average.

ukcarper

Crashy_Time wrote: »

I have posted it on the other thread. The actual cost including rooms in shared flats is around 71k. Averages out at around 4k a year for housing. I am very comfortable sitting back and watching the crash from that batting average.

£45k mortgage at 4.5% over 15 years £349 per month.

Crashy_Time

ukcarper wrote: »

£45k mortgage at 4.5% over 15 years £349 per month.

Don`t think you would have got 4.5% 15 years ago, and without the desperation of the recent ZIRP attempts to stave off the inevitable your averages would never work? Besides as I have stated a few times now I DIDN`T WANT TO OWN OR LIVE IN THE 45K FLATS THEN OR NOW, and they are heading back to 45k anyway. What is it about this that you fail to understand?


Besides, at one point I was paying £333 p.m to live in a house that was easily 7 or 800k to buy at the peak. You need the 45k flats to make your figures work, and you need to assume that buying is always the best decision?

Nonshy

First time buyers have next to no chance in London. Foreign investment is buying up anything and everything.... i don't know why the government don't introduce a tax on this?

ukcarper

Crashy_Time wrote: »

Don`t think you would have got 4.5% 15 years ago, and without the desperation of the recent ZIRP attempts to stave off the inevitable your averages would never work? Besides as I have stated a few times now I DIDN`T WANT TO OWN OR LIVE IN THE 45K FLATS THEN OR NOW, and they are heading back to 45k anyway. What is it about this that you fail to understand?


Besides, at one point I was paying £333 p.m to live in a house that was easily 7 or 800k to buy at the peak. You need the 45k flats to make your figures work, and you need to assume that buying is always the best decision?

That's the average since 1997, that £45k flat you linked to would have been less than £45k in 1997 and you only had 1 room in that house.