London Has Peaked

Bubble_and_Squeak

wotsthat wrote: »

Have you ever purchased a house before? You seem to have very little idea of how it works and a limited comprehension of standard deviations.

i think this is where i'm getting confused.
i only have the process friends and colleagues went through to go on.
one recently put his house on the market for £270k. he accepted an offer of £250k. 14 weeks later the sale completed and he got £250k.
another offered £380k. the offer was accepted. several months later he completed. the property cost him £380k.
i'm obviously missing a trick somewhere.

danothy

Bubble_and_Squeak wrote: »

theres only one liar here

There's probably many liars, but that's not the point. You're actively deluding yourself regarding when a sale price is actually set on a house.

Bubble_and_Squeak wrote: »

according to the LR they should be increasing

No, according to the Land Registry they have been increasing. You're showing a lack of understanding again. They may still well be increasing, they may not. Your 'evidence' doesn't really support that they are not though. The only way the listing you presented could be taken as evidence that they were decreasing is if the one currently listed and the one sold in May are of equal standard. This is why I asked if you were suggesting that they should hold identical values if on the same street. Well done for not answering that by the way.

How do you know that the one currently listed hasn't increased in value since it's last sale too, but is generally worth less than the one completed in May due to being in poorer condition? Finding a property with a lower asking price isn't the same thing as finding evidence for decreasing property value, no matter how much you want it to be.

danothy

Bubble_and_Squeak wrote: »

i think this is where i'm getting confused.
i only have the process friends and colleagues went through to go on.
one recently put his house on the market for £270k. he accepted an offer of £250k. 14 weeks later the sale completed and he got £250k.
another offered £380k. the offer was accepted. several months later he completed. the property cost him £380k.
i'm obviously missing a trick somewhere.

You certainly are. More than one it seems. The offers you speak of were non-binding and subject to change until exchange of contracts. I'll bet you still haven't checked to see how long it was between exchange and completion with either of your so called friends and colleagues.

The other point you seem to be missing is that on a street all the houses will not be the same value. There will be some above the average for that street, some below. If one of the ones in better condition sells, then they all increase in value, then one of the crumbier ones sells, the latter sale may well be lower than the first, but this does not mean that the values have dropped. When you make your comparisons you are not accounting for this possibility.

wotsthat

Bubble_and_Squeak wrote: »

i think this is where i'm getting confused.
i only have the process friends and colleagues went through to go on.
one recently put his house on the market for £270k. he accepted an offer of £250k. 14 weeks later the sale completed and he got £250k.
another offered £380k. the offer was accepted. several months later he completed. the property cost him £380k.
i'm obviously missing a trick somewhere.

I thought so - you have no experience of buying or selling and using a couple of pieces of outlying anecdotal data and developing a rule.

It's been explained to you already. Price is agreed at exchange which is usually a couple of weeks before completion.

If you make an offer and prices fall by 20% before you exchange what are you going to do? Pay 20% above market price? Likewise if I'm selling you my house and prices surge by 20% before you get around to exchanging contracts you're going to get some bad news.

That's why house buying is so stressful. Verbal offers aren't binding in any way. Prices are agreed between people who think the price is right so there's usually an urgency at that point to keep things moving.

Bubble_and_Squeak

wotsthat wrote: »

I thought so - you have no experience of buying or selling and using a couple of pieces of outlying anecdotal data and developing a rule.

It's been explained to you already. Price is agreed at exchange which is usually a couple of weeks before completion.

If you make an offer and prices fall by 20% before you exchange what are you going to do? Pay 20% above market price? Likewise if I'm selling you my house and prices surge by 20% before you get around to exchanging contracts you're going to get some bad news.

That's why house buying is so stressful. Verbal offers aren't binding in any way. Prices are agreed between people who think the price is right so there's usually an urgency at that point to keep things moving.

yes, you're right
another colleague of mine managed to negotiate a discount of 0.13% a couple of weeks before completing. that must have really skewed the LR figures for chingford that month!

Bubble_and_Squeak

danothy wrote: »

You certainly are. More than one it seems. The offers you speak of were non-binding and subject to change until exchange of contracts. I'll bet you still haven't checked to see how long it was between exchange and completion with either of your so called friends and colleagues.

The other point you seem to be missing is that on a street all the houses will not be the same value. There will be some above the average for that street, some below. If one of the ones in better condition sells, then they all increase in value, then one of the crumbier ones sells, the latter sale may well be lower than the first, but this does not mean that the values have dropped. When you make your comparisons you are not accounting for this possibility.

they may have been non-binding but the sales completed for a price agreed several months earlier. i don't understand why you're having so much difficulty grasping this concept.

Bubble_and_Squeak

danothy wrote: »

There's probably many liars, but that's not the point. You're actively deluding yourself regarding when a sale price is actually set on a house.



No, according to the Land Registry they have been increasing. You're showing a lack of understanding again. They may still well be increasing, they may not. Your 'evidence' doesn't really support that they are not though. The only way the listing you presented could be taken as evidence that they were decreasing is if the one currently listed and the one sold in May are of equal standard. This is why I asked if you were suggesting that they should hold identical values if on the same street. Well done for not answering that by the way.

How do you know that the one currently listed hasn't increased in value since it's last sale too, but is generally worth less than the one completed in May due to being in poorer condition? Finding a property with a lower asking price isn't the same thing as finding evidence for decreasing property value, no matter how much you want it to be.

the amount of increase implied by LR far exceeds the amount you would have to spend to bring that house up to the standard of the last sold.

wotsthat

Bubble_and_Squeak wrote: »

yes, you're right
another colleague of mine managed to negotiate a discount of 0.13% a couple of weeks before completing. that must have really skewed the LR figures for chingford that month!

Exactly, they agreed the price a couple of weeks before completion - until exchange it's up for negotiation.

danothy

Bubble_and_Squeak wrote: »

they may have been non-binding but the sales completed for a price agreed several months earlier. i don't understand why you're having so much difficulty grasping this concept.

And I don't see why you are having so much difficulty grasping the concept that the price wasn't actually agreed several months earlier. The fact is that it was agreed at exchange. That it wasn't binding and still up for negotiation (but in the cases you know about wasn't re-negotiated for whatever reason) should clue you in on that.

danothy

Bubble_and_Squeak wrote: »

the amount of increase implied by LR far exceeds the amount you would have to spend to bring that house up to the standard of the last sold.

Is that a fact? I suppose you have some sort of detailed knowledge of the condition of the listed property and the one sold in May and how much the actual amount needed to bring them in line would be? I expect your detailed knowledge also extends to precisely what the Land Registry 'implies' too? You surely know that the average property in E15 has increased in sale price by £10k-£20k between May and August then? And how that relates to these two properties specifically, given that they appear to be above the average sale price for the area? Why, I bet you can explain in detail why an asking price differential of £10k less when one would expect £20k more just on the averages is a sign of price drops, rather than a property that needs £30k of work in comparison to another one. Of course this all assumes that the listing of "offers Over £375,000" doesn't actually expect to get "offers Over £375,000" (yet another reason you shouldn't rely on listing price to establish value).