London property prices to fall 30%....

chucknorris

chappers wrote: »

To be fair we still party pretty hard and I don't plan on stopping just yet.

Well I went for a liver scan last month (just for a check up, no symptoms) and I was relieved to get the all clear, after literally averaging 90 alcohol units per week for decades, I am going to tone it down from now on. In fact I have already reduced it to 28 units, a couple of months ago.

Conrad

chucknorris wrote: »

Well I went for a liver scan last month (just for a check up, no symptoms) and I was relieved to get the all clear, after literally averaging 90 alcohol units per week for decades, I am going to tone it down from now on.

Despite being a fitness freak and fully committed full contact martial arts protagonist (no nancy Boy Shotokan or Tae Kwon Do for me, lol), I just have to drink every evening, usually 2 or 3 cans of IPA (3.6) plus a lot of wine at weekends.


Worries me but on the other hand I just enjoy it so much.
I drink plenty of water before bed and through the night, maybe it helps, maybe I'm kidding myself.

chucknorris

Conrad wrote: »

Despite being a fitness freak and fully committed full contact martial arts protagonist (no nancy Boy Shotokan or Tae Kwon Do for me, lol), I just have to drink every evening, usually 2 or 3 cans of IPA (3.6) plus a lot of wine at weekends.


Worries me but on the other hand I just enjoy it so much.
I drink plenty of water before bed and through the night, maybe it helps, maybe I'm kidding myself.

I'm the same Conrad, (or hopefully past tense, I was the same, but it is still early days), not martial arts these days, just keeping fit, I know what you mean about the full contact, they didn't have that back in my days, which is why I switched from karate to boxing.

My Doctor was really surprised when the blood tests and ultrasound scan of my liver, pancreas and gall bladder came back, and showed all was well. I have literally got away it, so now (at 57) it is definitely the time to seriously cut back. The last 2 months hasn't been as difficult as I thought that it would be, but it hasn't been easy either.

Graham_Devon

wotsthat wrote: »

I'd like to see the mathematical formula that shows how a constant (low interest rates) causes another factor (house prices) to increase in an exponential manner.



The big reductions in mortgage rates happened years ago. Any changes of the last few years are insignificant. I've gone from 2.5% since the GFC to 2.29% now. It's pennies - in Feb 2001 I went from 7.74% to 4.55%.

How much has your mortgage got cheaper by YoY?

Savills "warning" today over keeping interest rates low... Seems even estate agents get it!

Delaying interest rate rises for too long could allow house prices to grow at an unsustainable pace, Savills has warned.

Lucian Cook, director of residential research at the real estate company, said that "if rates remain too low for too long house prices could rise to a level that would become unsustainable if rates were subsequently to rise sharply”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/bank-of-england/11978397/Low-interest-rates-could-allow-unsustainable-house-price-growth.html

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Savills "warning" today over keeping interest rates low... Seems even estate agents get it!


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/bank-of-england/11978397/Low-interest-rates-could-allow-unsustainable-house-price-growth.html

He seems to think a constant interest rate has led to accelerating house prices increases YoY for seven years and only in London. Would've been nice if he explained how.

I think he realises talking about interest rates is good for media attention.

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I quite clearly stated I believe the ceiling has been hit...

Another peak called quickly followed by a new peak price.

By the time prices move South there won't be a single person who didn't call it.

Crashy_Time

westernpromise wrote: »

Generali wrote:

It's a very interesting premise. Do you have any evidence to support it?

It's what happened in 1989 - 1995.

Buying basically ate itself. Nobody wanted to buy in a falling market and nobody wanted to lend, either. So instead of a 10% deposit and 4x salary, lenders were looking at 30 to 40% deposits and 3x salary - stress-tested to see if you could afford them if rates doubled again (they'd gone from 7 to 15 and once back at 10 it was still seen as possible they could hit 18 or so, as had happened in the 70s).

So people piled into renting, the supply of which hadn't increased of course.

What got BTL started was that by 1996 - when the first BTL mortgage was launched - prices had fallen so low and rents risen so high (because of the demand not to be exposed to more house price falls) that you could buy a house and let it out right away for more than the mortgage.

In other words, the BTL boom that HPCers so hate was itself caused by the very crash they think they want repeated. I have never heard a crash troll admit that in such a crash their own buying power will be rapidly reduced by higher rent, higher deposits and lower salary multiples. I think they have genuinely not figured this out.

The difference this time though is that it is BTL that people will be fleeing from, not homeownership. Cheap credit caused the price bubble and the BTL boom, and the lack of credit (and tax) will finish it.

cells

Crashy_Time wrote: »

The difference this time though is that it is BTL that people will be fleeing from, not homeownership. Cheap credit caused the price bubble and the BTL boom, and the lack of credit (and tax) will finish it.

its a good theory but it breaks down when you ask yourself why the difference in price increase between London and the rest of England?

same mortgages same banks same interest rates and same BTLs

so why did London go up so much more?

And the answer is surely that population growth over the last 15 years was almost twice as high in London than the rest of England


also BTLers selling does not mean prices will go down. between 1995 - 2005 landlords were net sellers but prices did not fall

westernpromise

cells wrote: »

its a good theory but it breaks down when you ask yourself why the difference in price increase between London and the rest of England?

same mortgages same banks same interest rates and same BTLs

so why did London go up so much more?

And the answer is surely that population growth over the last 15 years was almost twice as high in London than the rest of England


also BTLers selling does not mean prices will go down. between 1995 - 2005 landlords were net sellers but prices did not fall

And likewise, in Ashford the Wilsons were net buyers of 1,000 homes and prices did nothing there that they didn't also do everywhere else.

chappers

chucknorris wrote: »

Well I went for a liver scan last month (just for a check up, no symptoms) and I was relieved to get the all clear, after literally averaging 90 alcohol units per week for decades, I am going to tone it down from now on. In fact I have already reduced it to 28 units, a couple of months ago.

Similar, being in the building trade the first port after work, was always the pub, followed by the weekend. I've lost count of the number of times I popped in for a quick one on a Friday night and finally made it home on a Sunday afternoon.
To be honest midweek drinking has been a rarity for me for the past couple of years and I've never been much of a drinker at home, unless we have guests, its always been about the pub for me.
Rugby days at the weekend are the big ones for us and then it can be carnage or people round for dinner then its usually 2 bottles of vino plus per man, maybe a bottle of port and a bottle of whisky or brandy.