Is now a really bad time to buy a house?

Ksw3

I'm continuing to buy because I would like a garden, pets, to be able to paint the walls a colour I like, to have twice as much space as I currently have. For me these benefits have value too and perhaps we are overpaying somewhat as the market has changed in the last few months but value gained isn't just the bricks. 

Silvertabby

We bought in 1994.  In hindsight, prices were still pretty much flat lining after the late 80s crash, but we didn't buy because we had a crystal ball, we bought because it was the right time for us.

Our mortgage rate was nearly 8%, so we were paying much more than we paid in (heavily subsidised) Armed Forces married quarter rent plus, being older than your typical first time buyers, we went straight for our 4 bed detached 'forever home'.

However, we got it right, and are still here.  Good luck with whatever you choose to do.

Sarah1Mitty2

RelievedSheff said:

We bought our last house in 2007, right before house prices took a turn. We were in negative equity with that property for a long time but it wasn't really a problem. We continued to pay the mortgage and eventually a combination of slowly rising house prices and the building of equity meant that we could move onto our current home in 2019.

Looking back, 2007 was still the right time to buy for us. We were in the position to buy our own home instead of paying rent. Rent would have been more expensive than our mortgage. The big lesson learned for us was to take our mortgage over as short a term as possible to pay less interest. We paid far too much interest on the previous  house due to the long 30 year term we took out and not being able to remortgage due to negative equity.

Important point. There is far too much nonsense trotted out about how negative equity doesn`t really matter. The shorter the term/cheaper the house the better for the buyer in the long term.

Silvertabby

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

RelievedSheff said:

We bought our last house in 2007, right before house prices took a turn. We were in negative equity with that property for a long time but it wasn't really a problem. We continued to pay the mortgage and eventually a combination of slowly rising house prices and the building of equity meant that we could move onto our current home in 2019.

Looking back, 2007 was still the right time to buy for us. We were in the position to buy our own home instead of paying rent. Rent would have been more expensive than our mortgage. The big lesson learned for us was to take our mortgage over as short a term as possible to pay less interest. We paid far too much interest on the previous  house due to the long 30 year term we took out and not being able to remortgage due to negative equity.

Important point. There is far too much nonsense trotted out about how negative equity doesn`t really matter. The shorter the term/cheaper the house the better for the buyer in the long term.

Exactly.  When we bought (with a higher than usual deposit) we did so in the knowledge that our joint Armed Forces pensions lump sums would more than clear our mortgage within 8 years.  When we went in the bank to make the payment, the mortgage advisor tried to convince us to keep our mortgage going and to 'invest' our lump sums in the stock market.  I know that some of those on here would have done exactly that - but that option wasn't for us. 

My late parents, however, couldn't see past the individual monthly payments.  When they moved house they wanted to take out another 25 year (the maximum at the time) mortgage but were limited to 20 years by dad's age.  They were convinced that they had been ripped off because the 20 year payments were more than the 25 year payments would have been.  They were mortgaged for 40 years, and I dread to think how much interest they paid in that time. 

goodwithsaving

Silvertabby said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

RelievedSheff said:

We bought our last house in 2007, right before house prices took a turn. We were in negative equity with that property for a long time but it wasn't really a problem. We continued to pay the mortgage and eventually a combination of slowly rising house prices and the building of equity meant that we could move onto our current home in 2019.

Looking back, 2007 was still the right time to buy for us. We were in the position to buy our own home instead of paying rent. Rent would have been more expensive than our mortgage. The big lesson learned for us was to take our mortgage over as short a term as possible to pay less interest. We paid far too much interest on the previous  house due to the long 30 year term we took out and not being able to remortgage due to negative equity.

Important point. There is far too much nonsense trotted out about how negative equity doesn`t really matter. The shorter the term/cheaper the house the better for the buyer in the long term.

Exactly.  When we bought (with a higher than usual deposit) we did so in the knowledge that our joint Armed Forces pensions lump sums would more than clear our mortgage within 8 years.  When we went in the bank to make the payment, the mortgage advisor tried to convince us to keep our mortgage going and to 'invest' our lump sums in the stock market.  I know that some of those on here would have done exactly that - but that option wasn't for us. 

My late parents, however, couldn't see past the individual monthly payments.  When they moved house they wanted to take out another 25 year (the maximum at the time) mortgage but were limited to 20 years by dad's age.  They were convinced that they had been ripped off because the 20 year payments were more than the 25 year payments would have been.  They were mortgaged for 40 years, and I dread to think how much interest they paid in that time. 

You can take out a longer term and overpay...to reduce the amount of interest. I took out a 38 year term and pay it as though it is a 23 year term. I am not committed to the higher payments should I have a very rainy month, which as a solo owner was important, however I choose to make them high to clear the debt more quickly. 

Silvertabby

goodwithsaving said:

Silvertabby said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

RelievedSheff said:

We bought our last house in 2007, right before house prices took a turn. We were in negative equity with that property for a long time but it wasn't really a problem. We continued to pay the mortgage and eventually a combination of slowly rising house prices and the building of equity meant that we could move onto our current home in 2019.

Looking back, 2007 was still the right time to buy for us. We were in the position to buy our own home instead of paying rent. Rent would have been more expensive than our mortgage. The big lesson learned for us was to take our mortgage over as short a term as possible to pay less interest. We paid far too much interest on the previous  house due to the long 30 year term we took out and not being able to remortgage due to negative equity.

Important point. There is far too much nonsense trotted out about how negative equity doesn`t really matter. The shorter the term/cheaper the house the better for the buyer in the long term.

Exactly.  When we bought (with a higher than usual deposit) we did so in the knowledge that our joint Armed Forces pensions lump sums would more than clear our mortgage within 8 years.  When we went in the bank to make the payment, the mortgage advisor tried to convince us to keep our mortgage going and to 'invest' our lump sums in the stock market.  I know that some of those on here would have done exactly that - but that option wasn't for us. 

My late parents, however, couldn't see past the individual monthly payments.  When they moved house they wanted to take out another 25 year (the maximum at the time) mortgage but were limited to 20 years by dad's age.  They were convinced that they had been ripped off because the 20 year payments were more than the 25 year payments would have been.  They were mortgaged for 40 years, and I dread to think how much interest they paid in that time. 

You can take out a longer term and overpay...to reduce the amount of interest. I took out a 38 year term and pay it as though it is a 23 year term. I am not committed to the higher payments should I have a very rainy month, which as a solo owner was important, however I choose to make them high to clear the debt more quickly. 

My mum and dad didn't believe in paying a penny more than they had to, so they wouldn't even have considered overpaying.

When I got married, instead of the birds and the bees lecture (a bit late for that - I was in my 30s!) she insisted that 'I get my stamp back' as it was 'better off in my my pocket than the Government's'.  By then, the  the married woman's stamp for new applicants was no longer an option, so I just said that it was no longer possible, as I knew that she just wouldn't have understood my decision to voluntarily pay the full whack.   That way her griping was at the Government, for 'robbing married women' instead of at me for 'throwing away good money'.

I know money was always tight for them, but they never did understand the difference between cost and value.  Toilet rolls £1 for 2 rolls, or on offer at £2 for 10 rolls?  Absolutely buy two rolls and 'save' £1. 

snowqueen555

Market is terrible here. There are so few properties about that everyone is fighting over whatever comes on. I offered 15% over asking and would have 60ltv, got outbid "significantly".

aoleks

it can't be, several users keep claiming prices are crashing. there's even evidence for it, some listings say "reduced today"!

snowqueen555

I'm at the bottom of the market so I think competition is tough. I'm in Bristol, rental is supposed to be even worse as well.

Sarah1Mitty2

Silvertabby said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

RelievedSheff said:

We bought our last house in 2007, right before house prices took a turn. We were in negative equity with that property for a long time but it wasn't really a problem. We continued to pay the mortgage and eventually a combination of slowly rising house prices and the building of equity meant that we could move onto our current home in 2019.

Looking back, 2007 was still the right time to buy for us. We were in the position to buy our own home instead of paying rent. Rent would have been more expensive than our mortgage. The big lesson learned for us was to take our mortgage over as short a term as possible to pay less interest. We paid far too much interest on the previous  house due to the long 30 year term we took out and not being able to remortgage due to negative equity.

Important point. There is far too much nonsense trotted out about how negative equity doesn`t really matter. The shorter the term/cheaper the house the better for the buyer in the long term.

Exactly.  When we bought (with a higher than usual deposit) we did so in the knowledge that our joint Armed Forces pensions lump sums would more than clear our mortgage within 8 years.  When we went in the bank to make the payment, the mortgage advisor tried to convince us to keep our mortgage going and to 'invest' our lump sums in the stock market.  I know that some of those on here would have done exactly that - but that option wasn't for us. 

My late parents, however, couldn't see past the individual monthly payments.  When they moved house they wanted to take out another 25 year (the maximum at the time) mortgage but were limited to 20 years by dad's age.  They were convinced that they had been ripped off because the 20 year payments were more than the 25 year payments would have been.  They were mortgaged for 40 years, and I dread to think how much interest they paid in that time. 

Many people even until quite recently only looked at the monthly payment and thought they could "afford" a house. After the news today it looks like the monthly payment will be even higher for most people.