So - negative equity?

pamaris

If you do decide that you need to move, you are on the right track thinking this through ahead of time... just price aggressively.

Running_Horse

SquatNow wrote: »

(Edit: As running horse demonstrated!)

It didn't take 18 years to recover, it took 18 years to triple. There is a difference.

Kez100

In the last crash we had to save to get ourself out of negative equity. Then we could move.

coloursixseven

mattb001 wrote: »

It's an ex council terrace, so probably the most susceptible of property for price falls, and not suitable to live in for more than a few years.

Excuse my ignorance, but why would an ex-council terrace be more susceptible to price falls than a terrace that isn't ex-council, or an ex-council flat? Or a mansion in Kensington?

epz_2

if you are serious about moving soon and dont have any penalty fees then it might be worth taking the hit, a small personal loan would cover an shortfall.

not all council property is dammed since lots of it has more space but if you are in a sink estate then run cause you may not be able to sell at any price, who would buy there when they could get a btl newbuild for buttons.

mattb001

Because generally, ex council properties tend to be in the most undesirable locations. From what I've read of the crash in the 80s, ex council terraces lost the most % value.

HugoSP

The other option you may have is to rent out the council house and then rent/buy somewhere else in the meantime.

Alternitively, if it's neighbours that are causing you a problem, try dealing with them.

Thirdly, look at reducing your mortgage, in the Mortgage Free thread

coloursixseven

mattb001 wrote: »

Because generally, ex council properties tend to be in the most undesirable locations. From what I've read of the crash in the 80s, ex council terraces lost the most % value.

Are you saying that you bought a house in the least desirable location? If so, then surely the fact that it is in the least desirable location was already factored into the "value" of the house - why would this mean that it would lose more value?

SquatNow

Running_Horse wrote: »

It didn't take 18 years to recover, it took 18 years to triple. There is a difference.

That's called inflation. Mostly.

Houses are higher vs wages than ever... it may take several 18 year cycles to recover to this point again. If ever.

Generali

The best thing to do is to pay down your mortgage as quickly as you can but then that's a pretty sensible thing to do anyway.

In the situation you describe you could move if you could either persuade your lender to lend to you unsecured or you could raise the funds from elsewhere.

You should note that you're predicting a fall in house prices of 40% from when you bought which would mean, on average, a 50% fall from where they are now. Whilst I don't think that's outside the range of possibilities at all, it's beyond what any forecaster I can think of has predicted.

Then I can't think of a 'proper' forecaster that predicted the length and strength of the house price bubble.