London is a joke (moan)

AdrianC

Jhoney wrote: »

Agreed. But in doing so, those owners bought at a discount, sold at a profit and bought into the mainstream housing market - thus reducing availability and/or increasing demand IYSWIM....

Of social housing, yes. But the pool of all properties didn't change, and the pool of privately-owned properties increased.

the properties were largely supporting families. noone vetted the buyer re size requirement/need. When those children fly the new family coop, they are competing for the same stock.

The number of households total didn't change, though, and the reduction in social housing was matched by a reduction in the families requiring social housing, just as the increase in privately-owned housing was matched by an increase in the households in privately-owned housing.

Sucession to the previous council owned one being n/a.

But there's improved succession to the privately owning stock (IHT notwithstanding, of course but, short of the Barbican, I can't see that being an issue for many ex-LA properties)

MT also promoted the principles of free market capitalism.

Of course. But Right to Buy was first mooted by the Labour party, at the 1959 election... They lost that election, so didn't implement it, but I wonder if history would view it differently if they had...? And, of course, let's not forget that Blair and Brown did nothing about getting shot of it during three terms, and Miliband isn't going to get rid of it this time, either.

It seems it's always wrong when the benefit isn't a personal one. Those getting H2B etc complain about people on benefits. One is more socially acceptable and has been spun better, but it's the same taxpayer money.

As I have said before on this thread, I don't mind helping others - that's what tax was intended to do, but I do mind the hypocrisy and the assertion that it's someone else's fault that things haven't yet gone to individual expectations.

Abso-flippin-lutely, with bells on!

Digsby

Cornucopia wrote: »

Thanks for the examples. I have to say that I've always considered Streatham and Tooting to be grossly over-priced, going back over a period of maybe 20 years. Streatham, particularly, with no Tube, I just don't see the appeal.

Fortunately for the good burghers of those areas, other people disagree.

In particular, there is the "nappy valley" phenomenon whereby young families are happy to live in urban Zone 2/3, where 30 years ago, they would have moved further out to get more space, less urban-ness and better schools.

I don't know much about the area, so I couldn't comment - I don't even live in London!

I guess you'll be wondering why I am looking at Streatham then?

I use another piece of my own software, for my eyes only, that does something similar to the chrome extension, but en masse, so it gathers daily statistics for whole swathes of listings - to teach me about how the market functions - and Streatham just happens to be the borough I picked for my sample in London.

So when you asked for examples, I ran a command to output current listings in most-overpriced order, Streatham was already set up as the area to analyse, it could have been any of the dozen or so places around the country I monitor.

steve2005

quidsy wrote: »

Move 10 - 20 miles out & you will get a 1 - 2 bed flat & travel costs of a 170 a month. You cant afford to buy in London, it's that simple. I earn 60k a year & cant afford what I want in London either, this is why I live 15 miles out where I have the chance of a house, garden & drive.

Exactly the same as us.
We love the area we live in now, but to move from our flat to a house we'd need to find £1,100,000 from somewhere.... so we've moved further out. Instead of being less than 6 miles from T Square we're now 12 miles from T Square, but we have a house, with a driveway, and a 120 ft garden.

Digsby

AdrianC wrote: »

I think you may have ignored the last seven words.

In that case, I think you may have ignored your own 10th and 11th words.

AdrianC wrote: »

Indeed. And that is the ONLY number that actually matters in any way, shape or form.

It may be the only number that matters in any way shape or form to you, but to me as a buyer, it matters.

Otherwise I may as well start viewing houses with £4m price tags and offering my budget of £200k. Asking prices matter to me because they indicate the ballpark the seller is in, and provide a starting point for negotiations.

What I've been saying, to the OP and any other buyers that care to listen, is that asking prices don't matter all that much because they are detached from reality and most sales are happening at much lower prices.

So taking my £200k budget, I shouldn't be restricting myself to houses for sale at £200k and below, or even £210k below. I probably shouldn't even be looking at houses with asking prices of £200k, because if I paid that for those then there is a good chance that I will be buying a house that's worth £150k (and please don't give me any nonsense about how it is worth £200k by dint of my paying £200k, excluding the possibility that anybody can get ripped off, ever).

I should definitely be looking in the £250k area, probably in the £275k area, and possibly in the £300k area. You can quickly rule out those in these price ranges that stand no chance of selling within your budget using my chrome extension, and the chancers that stand little chance of fetching the price they are after are usually pretty easy to spot.

tonymar

Glad I am not in London any more !

worked hard there just to live and pay bills

Now chilling in Spain !!

csgohan4

I moved out of London to Kent and I never looked back, Rent is 3 times cheaper and houses are more reasonable here. I can still get to Central London in 38 mins fast train lolz, couldn't be happier.

Jhoney_2

AdrianC wrote: »

Of social housing, yes. But the pool of all properties didn't change, and the pool of privately-owned properties increased.



The number of households total didn't change, though, and the reduction in social housing was matched by a reduction in the families requiring social housing, just as the increase in privately-owned housing was matched by an increase in the households in privately-owned housing.

But the families grow/up and they need homes so demand grows and now councils have a swap system as the cannot supply enough social homes to meet the demand - it's not all immigrants, there is a lot of underlying domestic demand from population growth and people moving into London from around the UK too.

All are competing with OP and Digsby etc so even the rental market is awash with people having difficulty trying to find somewhere reasonable to live with OPs criteria.



But there's improved succession to the privately owning stock (IHT notwithstanding, of course but, short of the Barbican, I can't see that being an issue for many ex-LA properties)



Of course. But Right to Buy was first mooted by the Labour party, at the 1959 election... They lost that election, so didn't implement it, but I wonder if history would view it differently if they had...? And, of course, let's not forget that Blair and Brown did nothing about getting shot of it during three terms, and Miliband isn't going to get rid of it this time, either.


They are all as bad as each other apart from political ideology tbh. As for getting rid of it, frankly it's too late and the discount applied will not make a big enough dent in property prices as they stand today for it to be affordable- even social housing property in most London areas.

Abso-flippin-lutely, with bells on!

Whilst I appreciate that it's expensive, it is what it is. There's this talk of greed, but it sounds like envy. If Digsby's tool and others like it work, I will be happy for them - but I can't see it, as vendor will just say jog on!

Teacher2

I have just checked the property prices for Slough which is near to where I live. You can buy a nice two bed flat near the station for £190-£200,000 and a terraced Victorian house equally near for £250-£300,000 where you could rent rooms out and share the mortgage. The journey to Paddington is just over 20 minutes. The area around Slough is glorious and, with Crossrail coming to Slough, it's the ideal investment.

Jhoney_2

Teacher2 wrote: »

I have just checked the property prices for Slough which is near to where I live. You can buy a nice two bed flat near the station for £190-£200,000 and a terraced Victorian house equally near for £250-£300,000 where you could rent rooms out and share the mortgage. The journey to Paddington is just over 20 minutes. The area around Slough is glorious and, with Crossrail coming to Slough, it's the ideal investment.

My understanding is that OP doesn't want to move out of London. See #4 . Seems to have gone awol, so thanks on his behalf.:)

Digbsy who doesn't live in London may be interested as he is looking at Streatham and many other parts of the country that are reasonably priced, as far as calculations based on previous purchase price and detailed area percentage growth analysis. He will be along shortly to speak for himself.

Happy Thursday everyone!:)

Digsby

Quizzical_Squirrel wrote: »

I think you're attempting to apply a scientific method to make yourself feel less powerless. To make yourself feel clever and in control.

I hope you can spot a rare bargain but fear it won't make any difference and the obsession will consume you.

And you must be ever so clever to know and understand my motivation and needs via a few posts on a chat forum. What can I say? I'm a software developer. I develop software to earn, learn and have fun. If those motivations are about ego massaging then there are a lot of insecure people out there. I'm not looking for a rare bargain, and I don't have some complex, clever equation that I'm kidding myself will get me one.

It's very simple - if a seller bought a house 15 years ago for £100k, and prices have doubled since that time, then I would expect to pay roughly £200k, all else being equal.

If they are asking for £300k, I'm not interested unless there is a good reason for it or they are prepared to talk sensible money. If there is a good reason for it, and it's within budget, then I am interested.

If you agree with that as a basic principle, then my software will help you by doing the fag packet calculations for you, and providing some other useful information and tools. If you don't then good luck and all the best.

Jhoney wrote: »

Whilst I appreciate that it's expensive, it is what it is. There's this talk of greed, but it sounds like envy. If Digsby's tool and others like it work, I will be happy for them - but I can't see it, as vendor will just say jog on!

I can see how it might sound like envy, but does the above sound like envy? I'm happy to pay twice as much as somebody else paid where the market has doubled, I'm not asking anybody to accept loads less than that, but I'm not going to pay three times as much.

Am I being unreasonable?