Anyone else finding it impossible to buy right now?

MobileSaver

JJR45 said:

MobileSaver said:

1) I made no such claim.
2)so while supply will increase to an extent (but nothing like the 840,000 you were implying) it will be pretty much cancelled out by a similar increase in demand.

No, such claim you say?

Correct.

You even quoted where I said there would be increased supply. However, as I pointed out, that increased supply will be pretty much cancelled out due to the increased demand from those few who are repossessed still now requiring somewhere to live.

JJR45 said:

In a correction, demand for social/ emergency housing does not offset repossessions

Where are these repossessed people going to live if demand for other forms of housing does not offset repossessions?

JJR45 said:

History is not supporting a word you write.

Over the last decade there have been around 150,000 repossessions in the UK which you seem to keep implying means increased supply but no increased demand. Can you remind everyone how house prices have been affected over the last decade by this repossession phenomenon of yours... ?

MobileSaver

JJR45 said:

But one thing is for sure if there is another trigger, the government has no other weapons.

If I had a pound for every time the HPC crowd have claimed "the government has no other weapons"...

JJR45

Over the last decade there have been around 150,000 repossessions in the UK which you seem to keep implying means increased supply but no increased demand. Can you remind everyone how house prices have been affected over the last decade by this repossession phenomenon of yours... ?

Yes, I set the repossessions for the UK.
No phenomenon, it is the rate they happen like in 2007. You could have 150,000 over a decade, but if you had 80k in one year that would upset the applecart.
I am not stating a new crash, but you seem desperate to deny house prices have ever fallen, why is that?
Why are you so desperate for them to increase, all it does is drain money out of the economy as people spend more servicing debt, where they could be spending it on products and services, growth divers.
But you knew that right.
What other weapons do the government have?
Negative interest rates?
Government debt now makes 2008 look like a small spending spree.
It has to be paid back, that will be negative to future growth, unless inflated away.
Which can't be done now due to government debt and consumer debt.
Rock and a hard place on where to go really, don't pretend the government has loads of room, it does not.
That is why the current easing of steps is irreversible, they can't afford them not to be.

MobileSaver

JJR45 said:

You could have 150,000 over a decade, but if you had 80k in one year that would upset the applecart.

No, it really wouldn't.

You just don't seem to be able to understand the fundamental flaw in your thinking. You are obsessed that a repossession means increased supply because there is one more property on the market but repeatedly ignore the simple and obvious fact that the repossessed family still need somewhere to live; this creates increased demand that all but cancels out the increased supply.

You could have 80,000 repossessions this year but those 80,000 families don't just disappear, they still have to live somewhere.

JJR45 said:

I am not stating a new crash, but you seem desperate to deny house prices have ever fallen, why is that?

Why are you resorting to making things up? I have never denied house prices have ever fallen.

JJR45 said:

What other weapons do the government have?

There are a multitude of ways that the government can support the housing market, here's a few to start you off...

1. Relaxing planning laws on brownfield sites
2. Reduce local housing plan times from seven years to just over two years
3. Replace the planning process with a clearer, rules based system to speed up house building
4. Introduce a government-backed mortgage guarantee
5. Change stamp duty to be payable by the seller rather than the buyer

JJR45

MobileSaver said:

1. Relaxing planning laws on brownfield sites
2. Reduce local housing plan times from seven years to just over two years
3. Replace the planning process with a clearer, rules based system to speed up house building
4. Introduce a government-backed mortgage guarantee
5. Change stamp duty to be payable by the seller rather than the buyer

1-3) Would probably deflate house prices as they would increase supply (not a bad thing, but not great for current owners.)
4) They have introduced that already to get 5% mortgages back.
5) Would not really have any effect, a bit like sticking you shoe on another foot. You generally pay it anyway so o different buying or selling. it would only help FTB, but that would be minimal as none pay SDLT upto £300k anyway.

MobileSaver

JJR45 said:

MobileSaver said:

1. Change stamp duty to be payable by the seller rather than the buyer

5) Would not really have any effect, a bit like sticking you shoe on another foot. You generally pay it anyway so o different buying or selling. it would only help FTB, but that would be minimal as none pay SDLT upto £300k anyway.

On the contrary, if sellers have to pay SDLT then the obvious response will be for sellers to simply include this in the price of the property; it's a win-win for everyone.

1. The seller just passes the new tax on to the buyer and in the process gets the feel-good factor of selling their asset for more. 
2. The buyer no longer has to pay thousands of pounds in SDLT up front, instead they'll just pay a negligible extra amount over a typical 25 year mortgage.
3. The lenders get to charge more interest on the higher purchase price so their profits increase.
4. The mortgage broker earns more commission on the higher purchase price.
   
5. The government are seen to be supporting the housing market by making it easier to get on the property ladder.

What's not to like?

BecsMags

YES!!! Bloody nightmare right now. 

We have adverse credit history, I thought getting a mortgage would be the hard bit, but that's turned out to be quite straightforward. Mortgage offer in hand, freaking hard to get a house. 

Properties being taken down hours after going up due to number of interest. Buyers regularly going in at 25k over the guide price, which I can't see the point of doing unless you have a massive deposit to cover overpaying. We went in at 380k on a house priced at 400k, accepted - woo hoo, what could go wrong. The valuation came back today at 360k, How can 2 valuations be so different? Unless by some miracle they want to sell for 20k less, it is going to fall through   

Capri84

A noticeable difference in the amount of properties coming to market this week. Quite an increase, so hopefully that’ll help quell some of the mental over-offers. 

thriftytracey

Capri84 said:

A noticeable difference in the amount of properties coming to market this week. Quite an increase, so hopefully that’ll help quell some of the mental over-offers. 

Our property went on RM yesterday so that's one!  There are 10 viewings booked which the EA is conducting.  I have been impressed by their professionalism quite a change from our last move 25+ years ago.

MaryNB

MobileSaver said:

JJR45 said:

MobileSaver said:

1. Change stamp duty to be payable by the seller rather than the buyer

5) Would not really have any effect, a bit like sticking you shoe on another foot. You generally pay it anyway so o different buying or selling. it would only help FTB, but that would be minimal as none pay SDLT upto £300k anyway.

On the contrary, if sellers have to pay SDLT then the obvious response will be for sellers to simply include this in the price of the property; it's a win-win for everyone.

1. The seller just passes the new tax on to the buyer and in the process gets the feel-good factor of selling their asset for more. 
2. The buyer no longer has to pay thousands of pounds in SDLT up front, instead they'll just pay a negligible extra amount over a typical 25 year mortgage.
3. The lenders get to charge more interest on the higher purchase price so their profits increase.
4. The mortgage broker earns more commission on the higher purchase price.
   
5. The government are seen to be supporting the housing market by making it easier to get on the property ladder.

What's not to like?

It can already be added to a mortgage. Although admittedly I don't know if it's allowed across all lenders.
So your proposal will have an adverse effect on FTBs.