Feeling I have overpaid

Davesnave

Crashy_Time wrote: »

The problem is that you are confusing "buying somewhere to live" with "somewhere safe to park money" (the latter is a favourite of people who seek to talk up the property market as a one way bet that can`t go wrong) We agree that Icelandic banks were not somewhere safe to park money (Flagged well in advance of the collapse on the site that some posters here love to hate) but seem to disagree on what a safe liquid investment is?

Fancy thinking somewhere safe to place most of our money and somewhere to reside could possibly be the same thing, eh?

The irony is, being 'confused' has turned out really well for us, but I'm not wishing to big-up personal achievement, or go into detail. Suffice to say that thanks to this wonderful Tory government*, our one property is now a potential development site with the option to sub-divide and sell off bits as and when, which might meet some people's standards for flexibility, though probably not yours. Doesn't mean we'll do it either.

I'm not putting down other people who want to approach things differently, or picking their posts apart. If others have a lifestyle where renting makes more sense, then they should go for that.

There's more than one way to live life, but putting it on hold till the stars and markets align.....nope, don't recommend that at all.


*may contain sarcasm

Crashy_Time

Davesnave wrote: »

Fancy thinking somewhere safe to place most of our money and somewhere to reside could possibly be the same thing, eh?

The irony is, being 'confused' has turned out really well for us, but I'm not wishing to big-up personal achievement, or go into detail. Suffice to say that thanks to this wonderful Tory government*, our one property is now a potential development site with the option to sub-divide and sell off bits as and when, which might meet some people's standards for flexibility, though probably not yours. Doesn't mean we'll do it either.

I'm not putting down other people who want to approach things differently, or picking their posts apart. If others have a lifestyle where renting makes more sense, then they should go for that.

There's more than one way to live life, but putting it on hold till the stars and markets align.....nope, don't recommend that at all.


*may contain sarcasm

* Did you mean the whole post? The scenario you describe becomes illiquid at the slightest economic downturn, so that would fail one of the main tests of "safety" IMO, i.e liquidity.

Davesnave

Crashy_Time wrote: »

* Did you mean the whole post? The scenario you describe becomes illiquid at the slightest economic downturn, so that would fail one of the main tests of "safety" IMO, i.e liquidity.

It's obvious to everyone where the intended sarcasm is in my post, but just for you, look up Class Q in relation to planning for redundant barns, because that was a wonderful gift from a political party I've never voted for!

As I don't want to go into details of my personal position, the only other observation I'd make is that you don't seem to know much about agricultural land and the way it holds its value. After all, no one's making any more of it.

Crashy_Time

Davesnave wrote: »

It's obvious to everyone where the intended sarcasm is in my post, but just for you, look up Class Q in relation to planning for redundant barns, because that was a wonderful gift from a political party I've never voted for!

As I don't want to go into details of my personal position, the only other observation I'd make is that you don't seem to know much about agricultural land and the way it holds its value. After all, no one's making any more of it.

How many house buyers in the country do you think are affected by this?

Davesnave

Crashy_Time wrote: »

How many house buyers in the country do you think are affected by this?

Irrelevant.

You made this personal by questioning our response to the last Crash, suggesting that a decison to buy property, rather than continue renting with our money in a liquid investment of some kind, was wrong.

I've replied to the effect that that our decision paid off. It wasn't just luck though; it was a combination of buying well and working bloody hard.

Having a property which ticked most boxes was key, rather than 'loving' the place.....which is what makes this relevant to the OP's original post. She doesn't love her house, but neither did we just after buying. It's where she'll be a few years time that matters, and that will be down to her personal resources.

Now I'm out. Go bother someone else.

Crashy_Time

Davesnave wrote: »

Irrelevant.

You made this personal by questioning our response to the last Crash, suggesting that a decison to buy property, rather than continue renting with our money in a liquid investment of some kind, was wrong.

I've replied to the effect that that our decision paid off. It wasn't just luck though; it was a combination of buying well and working bloody hard.

Having a property which ticked most boxes was key, rather than 'loving' the place.....which is what makes this relevant to the OP's original post. She doesn't love her house, but neither did we just after buying. It's where she'll be a few years time that matters, and that will be down to her personal resources.

Now I'm out. Go bother someone else.

No, I questioned the implication that property generally was a "safe place to park cash" now, not when you bought. It isn`t IMO, but as most people "buy" with debt it doesn`t really matter all that much anyway.

Albala

Property can devalue, but if you are in it for the long haul and getting the benefit of living in it rent-free, it almost always holds its value and/or leaves you ahead, unless you are forced to buy and/or sell at very disadvantageous times. However, you do have to maintain it. Shares are similar in that in the long term you usually win if you spread your risks across a lot of sectors, and though you don't save rent, you have lower costs, and can get dividends, but with property it is always there, wheres shares can devalue to zero and become worthless.
Anywhere else you put your money will either be more stable but with lower yields, often lower than inflation, or will be potentially higher yield, but even more risky, like commodities. You pays your money and you takes your choice. But when rents in many areas are higher than mortgage payments on the same property, buying usually makes far more sense than renting, provided you are in a position to do it.
The only 'safe' place to leave your money is in a bank covered by the government scheme on deposits (provided you are careful about which one(s) and how much in each, bearing in mind some banks are part of the same organisation and so your money is only covered up to the one limit for money you have in all of them) and good luck even keeping pace with inflation if you do that. Or maybe gilts. Meanwhile, of course, you are paying rent....for ever.

Crashy_Time

Albala wrote: »

Property can devalue, but if you are in it for the long haul and getting the benefit of living in it rent-free, it almost always holds its value and/or leaves you ahead, unless you are forced to buy and/or sell at very disadvantageous times. However, you do have to maintain it. Shares are similar in that in the long term you usually win if you spread your risks across a lot of sectors, and though you don't save rent, you have lower costs, and can get dividends, but with property it is always there, wheres shares can devalue to zero and become worthless.
Anywhere else you put your money will either be more stable but with lower yields, often lower than inflation, or will be potentially higher yield, but even more risky, like commodities. You pays your money and you takes your choice. But when rents in many areas are higher than mortgage payments on the same property, buying usually makes far more sense than renting, provided you are in a position to do it.
The only 'safe' place to leave your money is in a bank covered by the government scheme on deposits (provided you are careful about which one(s) and how much in each, bearing in mind some banks are part of the same organisation and so your money is only covered up to the one limit for money you have in all of them) and good luck even keeping pace with inflation if you do that. Or maybe gilts. Meanwhile, of course, you are paying rent....for ever.

That part alone would make me wary of taking your advice on safe places to keep money.

tori.k

How do you get your maths to stack up CT that property isn't a safe investment.
Lets take John and phil
John buys his house for 100k 2% interest 15 year mortgage and Phil his neighbour rents the house next door for 500 a month.
Over the years John has 10K of maintenance on his house.
Phils been lucky landlord hasn't increased his rent he's has no maintenance and only paid 90K in rent by the time Johns mortgage is done and to top it off the housing bubble has burst and John house is only worth 50K
John has to sell but happy enough as he walks away with 50K as his housing costs have been 77.5K over the 15 years so better off than phil by 12.5K.
Rule of thumb if your lifestyle is pretty transient then rent, but if your planning in staying long term in a area then its a no brainer to buy.

Crashy_Time

tori.k wrote: »

How do you get your maths to stack up CT that property isn't a safe investment.
Lets take John and phil
John buys his house for 100k 2% interest 15 year mortgage and Phil his neighbour rents the house next door for 500 a month.
Over the years John has 10K of maintenance on his house.
Phils been lucky landlord hasn't increased his rent he's has no maintenance and only paid 90K in rent by the time Johns mortgage is done and to top it off the housing bubble has burst and John house is only worth 50K
John has to sell but happy enough as he walks away with 50K as his housing costs have been 77.5K over the 15 years so better off than phil by 12.5K.
Rule of thumb if your lifestyle is pretty transient then rent, but if your planning in staying long term in a area then its a no brainer to buy.

The question was - "Is property a safe place to park money". Living in a mortgaged house for 15 years isn`t "parking" money.