UK Affordability still very good

economic

ukcarper wrote: »

I'd say that if someone can buy with a 4x salary mortgage and a 10% deposit the property is affordable. Buying a property is not a right so I would say 4x median full time earnings + 10% would be OK for a flat and 4x median household earnings + 10% for house.

As you say affordable means different things to different people but as far as I'm concerned property is still affordable in some parts of the country but unaffordable in many especially London and the south east.

but London has always been unaffordable to many. when my parents immigrated to this country they couldn't afford to buy. they had to borrow from family to buy their first home. as they saved, they paid back the family. this was in the 80s.


there are many immigrants with little money and they cant afford. should they be able to? they are included in your median wage numbers.

ukcarper

economic wrote: »

ok so say 220k home purchase for someone earning 40k. lets say they save 1k a month so that's 12k (its doable unless you are stupid like that vegas couple).


for a 20% deposit of 44k it would take at most 4 years to save that. they can get a 4.5x mortgage and voila, they have a cheap house, without any assistance. if they started in 2013, they would have been able to afford by now. easily possible for someone who is now in their late 20s or early 30s.


for the average house, it would be at least a two bed, why would a single person need to buy the average house? I think you agree with me now on this but others may not.

How many houses in London for £220k or less you wouldn't get one for that where I am 40 miles outside London. As for a single person that's about £160K how many flats for that none where I am.

Graham_Devon

ukcarper wrote: »

I'd say that if someone can buy with a 4x salary mortgage and a 10% deposit the property is affordable. Buying a property is not a right so I would say 4x median full time earnings + 10% would be OK for a flat and 4x median household earnings + 10% for house.

As you say affordable means different things to different people but as far as I'm concerned property is still affordable in some parts of the country but unaffordable in many especially London and the south east.

That doesn't answer the question.

It's a really simple question too.

economic

ukcarper wrote: »

How many houses in London for £220k or less you wouldn't get one for that where I am 40 miles outside London. As for a single person that's about £160K how many flats for that none where I am.

if you do a zoopla search for London and max price 220k, you will see there are over 1000 such properties. remember this is for someone on 40k a year only and saved for 4 years. imagine those who saved for longer. I bought my first property at 30.


also I had a look and on average 25% of the uk population work part time. assuming true for London also then 25% of the people in the 40k median wage data work part time. is this true? if so can you see how even the median distorts the picture? someone working part time and complains they cant buy a property in London should realise he/she needs to work full time to maybe achieve the possibility!

ukcarper

economic wrote: »

if you do a zoopla search for London and max price 220k, you will see there are over 1000 such properties. remember this is for someone on 40k a year only and saved for 4 years. imagine those who saved for longer. I bought my first property at 30.


also I had a look and on average 25% of the uk population work part time. assuming true for London also then 25% of the people in the 40k median wage data work part time. is this true? if so can you see how even the median distorts the picture? someone working part time and complains they cant buy a property in London should realise he/she needs to work full time to maybe achieve the possibility!

If you look deeper you will that the majority of those properties are not flats or houses that are not over sixties or shared ownership.

The median I have been quoting is for full time earnings if you include part time it's much lower.

economic

ukcarper wrote: »

If you look deeper you will that the majority of those properties are not flats or houses that are not over sixties or shared ownership.

The median I have been quoting is for full time earnings if you include part time it's much lower.

ive excluded shared ownership and retirements homes in zoopla and still get around 700 properties worth less then 220k. still a decent number.


on median wages - fair enough.

ukcarper

ukcarper wrote: »

I'd say that if someone can buy with a 4x salary mortgage and a 10% deposit the property is affordable. Buying a property is not a right so I would say 4x median full time earnings + 10% would be OK for a flat and 4x median household earnings + 10% for house.

As you say affordable means different things to different people but as far as I'm concerned property is still affordable in some parts of the country but unaffordable in many especially London and the south east.

Graham_Devon wrote: »

That doesn't answer the question.

It's a really simple question too.

What question my first paragraph answers how I would define affordablity.

ukcarper

economic wrote: »

ive excluded shared ownership and retirements homes in zoopla and still get around 700 properties worth less then 220k. still a decent number.


on median wages - fair enough.

Have you actually looked at properties it includes parking spaces garages etc.

economic

ukcarper wrote: »

Have you actually looked at properties it includes parking spaces garages etc.

ok ive also filtered for properties at least 1 bed. so I haven't even included studios. I still get over 400 properties, a decent number.

Graham_Devon

ukcarper wrote: »

What question my first paragraph answers how I would define affordablity.

The question I posed to you in my first post, and then quoted to you when I asked you to answer a second time round. Then we did the third time round.

However, I give up on asking four times. Was trying to have a half decent convo