Do you want house price to rise or fall?

ukcarper

andrewf75 wrote: »

well call it what you want, but other countries don't have this thing with housing as investment. People buy houses as homes. I'm not familiar with "crashy" my comment was about the country as a whole though not slightly odd individuals!

I don't think the majority of people see thier house as an investment they see it as thier home.

chucknorris

ukcarper wrote: »

I don't think the majority of people see thier house as an investment they see it as thier home.

Exactly! Although it happens to be a good investment, and I do actually own investment property. I bought my home simply as a home, and I would have done so even if it had not been such a good investment.

ukcarper

chucknorris wrote: »

Exactly! Although it happens to be a good investment, and I do actually own investment property. I bought my home simply as a home, and I would have done so even if it had not been such a good investment.

If my property hadn't increased the amount it has it wouldn't make any difference to me. Although initially I was paying more on mortgage than I would have on rent for the majority of the term it was less and now I'm living rent free and that wouldn't change.

chucknorris

ukcarper wrote: »

If my property hadn't increased the amount it has it wouldn't make any difference to me. Although initially I was paying more on mortgage than I would have on rent for the majority of the term it was less and now I'm living rent free and that wouldn't change.

I bought an investment property in 1991 for £58,500, I still own it, when I first bought it, the rent just about only covered the mortgage. That was about £600/month, I can't actually remember (but it won't be far off). That was when mortgage rates (as you will no doubt know) were much higher. Right now I let that property for £1,850/month and the mortgage payment is only £129.09/month, so that is obviously the long term value in buying. Alternatively if I had taken out a repayment mortgage, the monthly payment now would be nothing (mortgage paid off). But I invested what would have been the capital repayment elsewhere, and I'm happy with that return too. But if I had rented, I would not be happy reading this post, revealing what the cost of not buying turned out to be.

EDIT: Read it and weep Crashy, because that is more or less exactly what you have done.

ukcarper

chucknorris wrote: »

I bought an investment property in 1991 for £58,500, I still own it, when I first bought it, the rent just about only covered the mortgage. That was about £600/month, I can't actually remember (but it won't be far off). That was when mortgage rates (as you will no doubt know) were much higher. Right now I let that property for £1,850/month and the mortgage payment is only £129.09/month, so that is obviously the long term value in buying. Alternatively if I had taken out a repayment mortgage, the monthly payment now would be nothing (mortgage paid off). But I invested what would have been the capital repayment elsewhere, and I'm happy with that return too. But if I had rented, I would not be happy reading this post, revealing what the cost of not buying turned out to be.

EDIT: Read it and weep Crashy, because that is more or less exactly what you have done.

And the bottom line is that if prices had just kept up with inflation your profits would have been lower but still reasonable.

PixelPound

chucknorris wrote: »

Exactly! Although it happens to be a good investment, and I do actually own investment property. I bought my home simply as a home, and I would have done so even if it had not been such a good investment.

People buy what they can afford, as its their home, not what they will get back for it. When they are moving it's relative costs of moving that is the concern. The long term trend of mortgage rates is more important than long term trend of house prices.

We do have an obsession in this country with home ownership, but that's in part because of the rental market. It's cheaper to buy than rent, you now just need a large deposit than before

chucknorris

nic_c wrote: »

People buy what they can afford, as its their home, not what they will get back for it.

When I said 'good investment', I wasn't referring to capital values, IMO the value of owning isn't so much increasing equity, it is more about locking the price in year 1, and only paying the mortgage based on that value, and of course the future possibility of paying it off altogether (although the last two houses that I have bought, I did so without any mortgage).

toomsie

I will say. Hope it falls. Those who already have a house will still have them, and new people coming in will be able to afford them. I understand that those who just bought will end up in negative equity though.

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn

toomsie wrote: »

I will say. Hope it falls. Those who already have a house will still have them, and new people coming in will be able to afford them. I understand that those who just bought will end up in negative equity though.

Whenever house prices drop it's people who already have money that benefit... Not 1st time buyers. The bank isn't exactly keen to lend money on a depreciating asset. 1st time buyers won't get a mortgage easily and homeowners aren't forced to sell when prices drop so you'll see even fewer properties on the market.

toomsie

movilogo wrote: »

Gradually small/medium businesses will move out of London. If not moving out, they will not expand within London for sure.

Automation machine and robots will be the next to move out of London.