Buying cheaper than social housing for half the country

iantojones40

I'm reasonably familiar with the market in the North West and North Wales and I can assure you those ''average'' prices would only get you a distinctly below average terrace in a very undesirable area, seems likely that the few ultra cheap terraces in hideous areas are dragging that average down.

Generali

iantojones40 wrote: »

I'm reasonably familiar with the market in the North West and North Wales and I can assure you those prices would only get you a distinctly below average terrace in a very undesirable area, seems likely that the few ultra cheap terraces in hideous areas are dragging that average down.

Yup, it's grim up north.

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Don't think I have, seems you already had it wrong when you tried to second guess his point a few posts back and found yourself corrected.

-buying is cheaper than social housing in half the country (I'm taking that at face value)

- you've said people on housing benefits can't get mortgages so the point is moot. However, if people could get themselves off housing benefits they'd find ownership was within reach. Again 'moot' because we know everyone in social housing is disabled etc.

- you've then said the point is moot again because people can't rent a council house at social rent prices so are paying more to rent from private landlords i.e. even more expensive than what they could buy for.

A number of people have said no-one wants to buy because it's grim up North™. That doesn't make complete sense because people tend to settle not very far from their local area and seek jobs there. The question is why would people choose a more expensive renting option when they're committed to the area by family ties, employment, friends etc. and buying is affordable and, in some cases, downright cheap?

I'd suggest mortgage availability is the main factor.

It's easy to get into the 'houses are simply too expensive' mindset and we know the media, and the people they spoon feed, love a housing is expensive story. A little more boring to report on people in a lot of the country just buying and getting on with life.

The '90's have a lot to answer for. Exceptionally low prices are now looked on as the correct norm.

Oh, and if there are any refugees from the South who want to move North and engage in their favourite hobby of bidding up prices you're more than welcome - I'm trying to move in the opposite direction.

wotsthat

iantojones40 wrote: »

I'm reasonably familiar with the market in the North West and North Wales and I can assure you those ''average'' prices would only get you a distinctly below average terrace in a very undesirable area, seems likely that the few ultra cheap terraces in hideous areas are dragging that average down.

...and the alternative social housing schemes that would cost about the same are lovely?

Graham_Devon

wotsthat wrote: »

- you've said people on housing benefits can't get mortgages so the point is moot. However, if people could get themselves off housing benefits they'd find ownership was within reach. Again 'moot' because we know everyone in social housing is disabled etc.

Amazing - if people earn more they may be able to afford more.

Who'd have thunk it?!

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Amazing - if people earn more they may be able to afford more.

Who'd have thunk it?!

Yes, it's not rocket science to suggest people on benefits might find many areas of the UK really quite affordable if they could earn more.

That's by the by really because it doesn't explain why people, who could support a mortgage payment, are choosing the more expensive private rental route.

Maybe they're irrational, saving up to move South or they can't get a mortgage because of mortgage rationing/ a return to sensible lending.

More lending and more building would increase the OO rate and shaft BTL's. I'm starting to think some of the 'bears' are secret landlords.

Graham_Devon

wotsthat wrote: »

That's by the by really because it doesn't explain why people, who could support a mortgage payment, are choosing the more expensive private rental route.

I've already explained that. Cells is referencing the cheapest of the cheap.

Would you buy a place that doesn't sut your requirements? Probably not. So why keep expecting everyone else too. A 2 bed terrace doesn't suit the entire population. Many of the people these houses do suit may not be able to afford them. Sure, your couple both earning full time wages can, but again, that's not really realistic for huge swathes of people.

It's called reality.

The problem on this forum is that we want to place people into around 6 boxes, all neatly packaged up in order to ignore said reality.

It's alright to be sat here saying "why are people doing this", but I'd suggest looking further than your monitor and examining exactly why and you will find all the answers.

GunJack

if only buying a house was as simple as "here, I'll pay £x a month for a mortgage"
buying costs, deposit, renovation costs (as half your "affordable" houses would need full renovation), oh, and we won't lend on that property because it needs renovating, ongoing maintenance & insurance, etc., etc., etc.,

To an awful lot of people in the country, an extra £30 a month on social rent is FAR more affordable than buying.....

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Would you buy a place that doesn't suit your requirements? Probably not. So why keep expecting everyone else too. A 2 bed terrace doesn't suit the entire population. Many of the people these houses do suit may not be able to afford them. Sure, your couple both earning full time wages can, but again, that's not really realistic for huge swathes of people.

I don't think the issue is suitability of accommodation.

There are places available in cheaper parts of the country that do meet people's requirements but they can't get a mortgage so have to rent at a higher monthly cost.

For the same money they could buy a nicer/ more suitable place than they can rent so owning gives a better chance of landing a place that meets requirements.

Expensive places like London are different because rental yields are lower and it's full of mobile young people who want to rent anyway.

Herzlos

michaels wrote: »

Are these rates for a 17 year fixed rate mortgage?

That's what I was thinking. When I bought, I was paying 6% on my mortgage, which totally ruins your figures.
Sure, with interest rates at an all time low (I'm now on 2.5%), buying is cheaper than renting, but there's nothing to say they'll stay that low until it's paid off. Indeed, it's likely that when they start to rise they'll shoot up.

And that's without factoring in fees, and renovations that are covered by the social housing.