BBC house price report

ukcarper

GunJack wrote: »

yes, if someone decides to move out of home and rent, not if they stay at home for a bit longer to get a deposit... I wouldn't recommend renting if avoidable anyway....

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make.

GunJack

Question....why are people making a big issue over 2 or 3 bedrooms?? Round here there's virtually no difference in price for 2 and 3 bed terraces, can I assume in the areas you are familiar with there's a bigger differential??

GunJack

ukcarper wrote: »

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make.

the point is, whilst living at home and saving, the "keep" paid by a youngster would be a lot less than having to pay CT etc. if they moved into rented. Or do you think parents should charge their kids £400 a month keep while they're trying to save a deposit??

Herzlos

GunJack wrote: »

Question....why are people making a big issue over 2 or 3 bedrooms?? Round here there's virtually no difference in price for 2 and 3 bed terraces, can I assume in the areas you are familiar with there's a bigger differential??

I think it just suits his point better. Here there's very little difference between 1 bed (~£90k), 2 bed (~£100k) and 3 bed (~£120k). So it's notably harder for a single person to get a 1 bed than a couple getting a 2 bed.

ukcarper

GunJack wrote: »

the point is, whilst living at home and saving, the "keep" paid by a youngster would be a lot less than having to pay CT etc. if they moved into rented. Or do you think parents should charge their kids £400 a month keep while they're trying to save a deposit??

I don't see how that is relevant to the affordability of property. It's obviously better for someone to live with parents and save if they can that has always been the case, although that is not possible for everyone.

GunJack

ukcarper wrote: »

I don't see how that is relevant to the affordability of property..

because property being affordable includes all those costs, it's not just mortgage payment v rent payment...

GunJack

ukcarper wrote: »

I don't see how that is relevant to the affordability of property. It's obviously better for someone to live with parents and save if they can that has always been the case, although that is not possible for everyone.

ok, look at it another way....if a youngster can get together the buying costs and afford the mortgage payments comfortably without all the other costs that some people seem to want to ignore, why shouldn't they buy, let it out for a few years whilst living at home cheaply (and possibly making a small profit on it) before moving into it themselves? Would that satisfy your criteria of "affordable"??

GunJack

GreatApe wrote: »

£16,000 per year for a full time job is almost minimum wage that isn't doing well that really is at the bottom of the pile. BTW I dont say that to be disrespectful just to note a fact. As Mathusian pointed out to you min
wage at 19 is £4k-plus less, big difference


I dont agree, even in your sons case he earns £1,180 per month post taxes and I assume he lives at home with you and is 18. He could save £900 a month if he was MSE.

Save £900 a month? £280 wouldn't cover his transport & keep, so no, that's not a realistic figure, especially as already pointed out to you a car is pretty much essential round here for current and future improved employment...

ukcarper

GunJack wrote: »

ok, look at it another way....if a youngster can get together the buying costs and afford the mortgage payments comfortably without all the other costs that some people seem to want to ignore, why shouldn't they buy, let it out for a few years whilst living at home cheaply (and possibly making a small profit on it) before moving into it themselves? Would that satisfy your criteria of "affordable"??

Can't argu with that, but if you want to live on your own most those other bills are payable whether you rent or buy.

Property has always been unaffordable to some people, if I was earning a similar salary in real terms to your son when I bough in early 70s I would not have been able to buy. If your son was Earning the equivalent to my earnings in early 70s now he could buy now.

GunJack

ukcarper wrote: »

Can't argu with that, but if you want to live on your own most those other bills are payable whether you rent or buy.

Property has always been unaffordable to some people, if I was earning a similar salary in real terms to your son when I bough in early 70s I would not have been able to buy. If your son was Earning the equivalent to my earnings in early 70s now he could buy now.

I think that single people should aspire to buying a house...irrespective of relationship status they can't be expected to live in the parental home forever

I sat him down and worked through the total monthly costs with him, and he could afford the monthly mortgage/bills/transport, he just needs to save a bit more for buying costs (inc. deposit)...luckily where we are he will only need 4x salary mortgage so more do-able than a lot of places, but harder than in others, like the NE for example where he could buy at 2-3x salary.

The BTL scenario above I have put to him as a serious proposal..