Is now really a bad time to buy?

Norman_Castle

Crashy_Time said:

MobileSaver said:

Crashy_Time said:

MobileSaver said:

many believe the enforced lockdown may well lead to a house price increase in certain types of property; your perfect FTB house in a desirable area could well be one of them.

Are you hoping that your property might benefit by any chance?

No. I'm in my dream home fully expecting to only leave here in a coffin and I have no kids to leave the house to. My other properties will only be sold when my elderly relatives finally shuffle off this mortal coil which hopefully will be at least a decade or two from now.

What house prices do this year, next year or the year after simply does not affect me in the slightest. I know that doesn't fit your narrative that anyone challenging the HPC mantra must (ironically) have a vested interest but that's life.

It affects other people though, and I don`t think it takes very much deep thought to conclude that borrowing/paying less for basic shelter is a resounding positive for ordinary people?

It shouldn't take much deep though to understand some "ordinary people" have invested in an asset which presumably they would prefer to retain or increase in value. We're not all in the same position with regard to home ownership.

BikingBud

Norman_Castle said:

Crashy_Time said:

MobileSaver said:

Crashy_Time said:

MobileSaver said:

many believe the enforced lockdown may well lead to a house price increase in certain types of property; your perfect FTB house in a desirable area could well be one of them.

Are you hoping that your property might benefit by any chance?

No. I'm in my dream home fully expecting to only leave here in a coffin and I have no kids to leave the house to. My other properties will only be sold when my elderly relatives finally shuffle off this mortal coil which hopefully will be at least a decade or two from now.

What house prices do this year, next year or the year after simply does not affect me in the slightest. I know that doesn't fit your narrative that anyone challenging the HPC mantra must (ironically) have a vested interest but that's life.

It affects other people though, and I don`t think it takes very much deep thought to conclude that borrowing/paying less for basic shelter is a resounding positive for ordinary people?

It shouldn't take much deep though to understand some "ordinary people" have invested in an asset which presumably they would prefer to retain or increase in value. We're not all in the same position with regard to home ownership.

And isn't that the fundamental problem, classing it as asset rather than a home tends to bring out the worst traits in all.  All other critical components to support life are viewed differently yet people consider a house a small pot of gold or a pension that should be protected to the detriment of all other things, including integrity and honesty.

Crashy_Time

MobileSaver said:

Crashy_Time said:

The biggest mistake the UK has made in recent years is allowing Economy to = Housing Market, it is going to end very badly for a lot of people I think.

The government of the day has been encouraging home ownership since the 1920s, hardly recent!

The people this will end badly for are likely to be low paid renters who see their income decrease while their rents increase...

BikingBud said:

I seem to remember being advised to cut your coat according to your cloth, why do people, especially on a money saving site, consistently proclaim that house price rises are good and price drops are evil.

Because, as noted by Crashy, the housing market is inextricably linked to the country's overall economy. Generally speaking if house prices are falling sharply it is because the economy is in decline and that is bad news for most people.

Are you seriously suggesting that the UK economy in the 1920`s equalled the housing market? At first I thought you maybe just saw the world from your own little bubble, but now I think that you may be deliberately trying to mislead people. Is it that, or is it that you just have to be right? Do you also think that high paid renters are going to replace all the low paid renters in the "undesirable parts of town" as you are so fond of saying, or can you concede that if there is a wages shock it is BTL landlords who will be sucking up most of the pain? And as noted by Crashy, the housing market is inextricably linked......to the debt market!

Crashy_Time

Norman_Castle said:

Mutton_Geoff said:

Martin Lewis says this is why he wouldn’t be buying a house right now - https://www.idealhome.co.uk/news/martin-lewis-small-deposit-mortgage-249267

Misleading article title. His advice is not to buy with a small deposit,

‘I need to be honest with you, I have always pushed people to have a 10 per cent deposit, not a 5 per cent deposit,’ he told the caller. ‘Mortgage rates get far, far cheaper every five per cent you drop. And the biggest point it gets cheaper is going from 5 per cent  to 10 per cent.’

If you are looking to buy a house with a small deposit at the moment. Martin recommends speaking to a fee-free mortgage broker and possibly taking a look at the market, but holding off until you have at least a 10 per cent deposit."

He also says,

‘Obviously, it’s worth waiting at the moment if you haven’t made a decision,’ he explains. ‘See what’s going to happen to house prices. There’s a possibility they come down. Not a prediction – just a possibility.

‘You may be a lot better off waiting a year and building up to a 10 per cent deposit, so the mortgage is cheaper, and the house prices might be cheaper too."

And, ‘I can’t tell you what to do, but I wouldn’t be in a rush to be buying right now,’

He doesn't say its a really bad time, just to avoid buying with a small deposit and to be aware prices may drop.

Problem for many people (would be sellers in particular) is that depending on how bad the economic downturn gets a 10% deposit still might not be enough for some lenders, buyers might have to wait for more price declines before they move, and that could take a few months according to some posters?

MobileSaver

Crashy_Time said:

Are you seriously suggesting that the UK economy in the 1920`s equalled the housing market?

can you concede that if there is a wages shock it is BTL landlords who will be sucking up most of the pain?

Let me just check what I said... "The government of the day has been encouraging home ownership since the 1920s!" Nope I didn't suggest what you suggested. In the 1920s the government created tax breaks to encourage home ownership and that was the start of the growth in home ownership and the inevitable influence on the economy.

Rents are already increasing as a result of recent tax changes; do you think people are more likely to stop paying their rent or more likely to cut back on a Starbuck's latte or other unnecessary expense on the way to work each morning? I guarantee most landlords will still be landlords a year from now and they'll be doing all right.

Anyway this is again getting too much into debate territory and we should continue this once the Debate forum reopens.

jacko74

robatwork said:

I think it's a fantastic time to buy if you're upsizing. 

I can see prices have fallen and expect them to bounce back and more before the end of the year. So the house you're buying will probably appreciate more than the one you're in.

Of course this is just my opinion.

Can you provide links to some examples of these asking prices that have supposedly already fallen?
I'm not seeing evidence of that in my area... yet.
Also what are you basing your analysis on that prices will ''bounce back and more'' before the end of this year?

Norman_Castle

BikingBud said:

Norman_Castle said:

Crashy_Time said:

MobileSaver said:

Crashy_Time said:

MobileSaver said:

many believe the enforced lockdown may well lead to a house price increase in certain types of property; your perfect FTB house in a desirable area could well be one of them.

Are you hoping that your property might benefit by any chance?

No. I'm in my dream home fully expecting to only leave here in a coffin and I have no kids to leave the house to. My other properties will only be sold when my elderly relatives finally shuffle off this mortal coil which hopefully will be at least a decade or two from now.

What house prices do this year, next year or the year after simply does not affect me in the slightest. I know that doesn't fit your narrative that anyone challenging the HPC mantra must (ironically) have a vested interest but that's life.

It affects other people though, and I don`t think it takes very much deep thought to conclude that borrowing/paying less for basic shelter is a resounding positive for ordinary people?

It shouldn't take much deep though to understand some "ordinary people" have invested in an asset which presumably they would prefer to retain or increase in value. We're not all in the same position with regard to home ownership.

And isn't that the fundamental problem, classing it as asset rather than a home tends to bring out the worst traits in all.  All other critical components to support life are viewed differently yet people consider a house a small pot of gold or a pension that should be protected to the detriment of all other things, including integrity and honesty.

Most properties are far more than basic shelters or "critical components to support life".

BikingBud

Norman_Castle said:

BikingBud said:

Norman_Castle said:

It shouldn't take much deep though to understand some "ordinary people" have invested in an asset which presumably they would prefer to retain or increase in value. We're not all in the same position with regard to home ownership.

And isn't that the fundamental problem, classing it as asset rather than a home tends to bring out the worst traits in all.  All other critical components to support life are viewed differently yet people consider a house a small pot of gold or a pension that should be protected to the detriment of all other things, including integrity and honesty.

Most properties are far more than basic shelters or "critical components to support life".

To some. 

At the end of the day it is just a financial transaction and somewhere to live. If you end up having to work all hours and have no life because the mortgage you have to take on is crippling then you have become a slave to the system.

The fundamental question though is who really profits from these price increases? Not me, not you, not your kids or grandkids.  

If we put it in tax terms and we moved the Tax Freedom Day to Oct then there would be outrage.  When we pay more than we should for property we move the mortgage freedom period from 25 years to 30 or even 40 years out. If we return to 3 1/2 * wage then this period remains c 25 years.  We are all complaining already about retirement being pushed out to 66/67 and later yet we seem content to self-harm and inflict longer and longer loans to pay for shelter, simple or complex as you may like it to be.

Based upon the consideration that true wealth is about health and freedom, tying ourselves up to working till we are 65-70 or even later to pay interest on an over priced house is to me anathema. Our duty should be to protect the affordability of housing for the future generations and we should therefore negotiate prices down wherever and whenever. 

  

Crashy_Time

MobileSaver said:

Crashy_Time said:

Are you seriously suggesting that the UK economy in the 1920`s equalled the housing market?

can you concede that if there is a wages shock it is BTL landlords who will be sucking up most of the pain?

Let me just check what I said... "The government of the day has been encouraging home ownership since the 1920s!" Nope I didn't suggest what you suggested. In the 1920s the government created tax breaks to encourage home ownership and that was the start of the growth in home ownership and the inevitable influence on the economy.

Rents are already increasing as a result of recent tax changes; do you think people are more likely to stop paying their rent or more likely to cut back on a Starbuck's latte or other unnecessary expense on the way to work each morning? I guarantee most landlords will still be landlords a year from now and they'll be doing all right.

Anyway this is again getting too much into debate territory and we should continue this once the Debate forum reopens.

My point was about the last 15 years or so being a market that has never happened before in history, as in the way the public were allowed to use credit, and you responded with a comparison to the 1920`s and government "encouraging" home ownership with tax breaks, what possible connection does that have to the economics of the last 15 years?

Norman_Castle

BikingBud said:

Norman_Castle said:

BikingBud said:

Norman_Castle said:

It shouldn't take much deep though to understand some "ordinary people" have invested in an asset which presumably they would prefer to retain or increase in value. We're not all in the same position with regard to home ownership.

And isn't that the fundamental problem, classing it as asset rather than a home tends to bring out the worst traits in all.  All other critical components to support life are viewed differently yet people consider a house a small pot of gold or a pension that should be protected to the detriment of all other things, including integrity and honesty.

Most properties are far more than basic shelters or "critical components to support life".

Based upon the consideration that true wealth is about health and freedom, tying ourselves up to working till we are 65-70 or even later to pay interest on an over priced house is to me anathema. Our duty should be to protect the affordability of housing for the future generations and we should therefore negotiate prices down wherever and whenever. 

  

Good health and freedom of choice is more readily available if you are wealthy. I suspect most home owners would consider their duty is to protect their asset value for their future security and their beneficiaries and negotiate accordingly.