Panorama tonight - Bursting the house price bubble.(merged)

IveSeenTheLight

PasturesNew wrote: »

I can't believe some people bought without seeing. I'd definitely have to see the property, even if I paid a local independent person to pop by.

I bought my family home without seeing it.
I know it sounds weird but it was a calculated risk.

We had done lots of market research in the area and missed out on the same type of property on the same street six months earlier so we knew the layout of the house.
We decided to go for it when we viewed a house with one less bedroom and much smaller rooms with a difference of only 10K one evening.
I called up to view the property but was told it was closing in 2 hours time so no chance to go and see it.
As we knew the property layout, had saved up a bigger deposit (so could afford more than we bid for a similar house 6 months earlier) and used the fact that we knew there were to be 4 more bidders, we decided that the house could not be in too bad a state (normally everyone wants to re-decorate when they move in) so we put in a bid (subject to survey) and won by only 200 pounds.

We asked to view the property after we won the bid and while there was a lot of cosmetic changes to make, we believed we managed to get a very good deal.

I spent a week painting the whole house when we moved in and getting new carpets and the place looked brand new (it was only 8 years old anyway).

Our bargain was realised when only 2 months later, a property in the same street with one bedroom less sold for 30,000 more than we paid for ours.

So it is possible to buy a property without viewing it. but only if you have done substantial research before and can weigh it with how many other bidders there are for the property.

Its not something I would recommend though as it is a risk

IveSeenTheLight

Supercharge_Me wrote: »

I have nothing against people in business making money for themselves, however i do find it immoral when it involves life essientals, i.e,Shelter/Food/Water.

So are you out campaining against : -
Testco, Asda, Sainsburies etc etc etc
Any Mortgage Lender
Any local water authority, electricity provide, gas provider etc etc
The government (council tax).

Man you must live a very busy schedule

Generali

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

So are you out campaining against : -
Testco, Asda, Sainsburies etc etc etc
Any Mortgage Lender
Any local water authority, electricity provide, gas provider etc etc
The government (council tax).

Man you must live a very busy schedule

Not to mention the parasite professions:

Doctor
Nurse
Farmer
Pharmacist
Greengrocer
Baker

All profiting from the miserable need of others to maintain life.

chappers

Those that are blaming the BTL market for the demise of our economy, the famines in africa and anything else they can, should be opening their eyes to the wider picture. Which is "investors" overstretching themselves and buying recklessly.
Whilst it is probably true that the BTL market has had a big effect on the upsurge of the housing market, it has also had a knock on effect of driving the economy, leading to easier borrowing and a false sense of wealth.
But I, as someone who has carefully thought about my investment in property and who has not over stretched myself, cannot be blamed for the demise of those who have invested recklessly or stretched themselves to the limit, with overborrowing. Whilst the programme last night highlighted some fraud and sharp practice in the housing market this is not the main factor involved, in the current situation, the situation we find ourselves in now is one caused by greed and reckless property investment, driven by party politics and the need of the government to keep it's people happy by wrapping them in a blanket of false security, using intrest rates as the fan for the economic fire.

lynzpower

the fact of the matter is that human beings will always want the best they can get for what money they have at tiher disposal.

Its lovely to think that all investors/buyers etc 'should have taken responsibility' but that responsibility is totally a matter of opinion.

The banks have been lending this money, they have. They have been positively encouraging it, those 125% B&B ads with ther girl in the bowler hat saying stuff like 'get this debt before its too late' and encouraging people in.

Economics is not on the curriculum, so where do our young people get thier financial education from? Their parents, who too were never taught and dont understand., and the telly, with beeny & kirsty trotting it out. No wonder everyone thought it was get rich quick, its on tv literally day and night! Even now!!

So i think long overdue, lets restrict what is lent and have done with it. Im very dissapointed that the gov didnt step in before, and now they are scraping this mess from the cieling. Well done, gordy with your safe pair of hands.

Id like them to ban IO mortgages totally ( maybe with a view to including 'equity holidays' like mortgage holidays. so you can pay IO for a max of say 6 months in 5 years.

Id also like to see the government ban all lending of more than 4.5x income.

wriggly

fc123 wrote: »

Not everyone.....think of the non-doms...(no, mistake, they are being squeezed out now by tax changes)

Most non-doms don't benefit greatly from their status. I pay UK taxes on my income and savings in the UK, and I pay Aussie taxes on my savings and investments in Australia.

The changes mean I'll have to pay any difference between UK and Oz taxes on the overseas income in the UK. We're talking about £3,000 income, so £600 tax of which £300 is already paid to Oz govt. For the remaining £300 to be shared amongst you all, I have to go and pay an accountant to do the calculations.

wriggly

What I really came to say in this thread was that last night's Panorama seemed to me to not be a house price crash story. It was much more about rip-off property companies with dodgy solicitors and valuers on the side.

For anyone who owns a family house instead of a flat in an overdeveloped area, the story raise no alarm stronger than "flat housing market".

MissMoneypenny

Generali wrote: »

Not to mention the parasite professions:

Doctor
Nurse
Farmer
Pharmacist
Greengrocer
Baker

All profiting from the miserable need of others to maintain life.

I'll agree with farming being a parasite profession (or rather our over generous EU policy toward farming). Over 40% of the entire EU budget going to the Common Agriculture Policy, that went to just 5% of the EU population. Each EU cow costing us more per day than half the worlds population have to live on.

Having lived next to a farm for several years. the EU hand outs they got is amazing. They got a barn built that cost just under 1 million pounds! The things they told me. Even they found it a shock that the EU money was being spent so freely. Such as, £500 an acre NOT to grow sugarbeet. (We can import sugar cane for much cheaper than sugarbeet anyway.) Dig a hole in the ground, let the weather fill it, and you have a pond - nice little EU grant for that too. Just cut your hedges on one side for another EU grant, but they cut the other side so thin, that it made little difference to wildlife and so easy for the sparrowhalwks to get the birds out of the hedges. Huge overpayments during the foot and mouth ie 10 old rams worth £50 the lot at market, the farmer got £50 each for. The list just goes on.

My neighbours confessed that they had never had it so good, but still complained how little they had to others. I guess that is ingrained;) The wife drove a merc, kids at private schools and plenty of cash to buy that antique sideboard they saw for £46k.

You never see a farmer on a bike.

Edited to say, not much of the EU CAP wealth is passed on to the farmhands though. The ones who worked at the above farm, relied on benefits to help them live (child tax and working tax). They worked long hours too.

Generali

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

I'll agree with farming being a parasite profession (or rather our over generous EU policy toward farming). Over 40% of the entire EU budget going to the Common Agriculture Policy, that went to just 5% of the EU population. Each EU cow costing us more per day than half the worlds population have to live on.

Having lived next to a farm for several years. the EU hand outs they got is amazing. They got a barn built that cost just under 1 million pounds! The things they told me. Even they found it a shock that the EU money was being spent so freely. Such as, £500 an acre NOT to grow sugarbeet. (We can import sugar cane for much cheaper than sugarbeet anyway.) Dig a hole in the ground, let the weather fill it, and you have a pond - nice little EU grant for that too. Just cut your hedges on one side for another EU grant, but they cut the other side so thin, that it made little difference to wildlife and so easy for the sparrowhalwks to get the birds out of the hedges. Huge overpayments during the foot and mouth ie 10 old rams worth £50 the lot at market, the farmer got £50 each for. The list just goes on.

My neighbours confessed that they had never had it so good, but still complained how little they had to others. I guess that is ingrained;) The wife drove a merc, kids at private schools and plenty of cash to buy that antique sideboard they saw for £46k.

You never see a farmer on a bike.

Edited to say, not much of the EU CAP wealth is passed on to the farmhands though. The ones who worked at the above farm, relied on benefits to help them live (child tax and working tax). They worked long hours too.

I was once at a party with a load of farmers. The farmer started complaining that he'd had to give up motorsport due to "...that blasted EU" cutting his subsidies!

I don't blame farmers for taking subsidies. After all if the Govt subsidised hedge fund workers, I'd be the first in the queue. I blame Govts for giving them and the electorate for voting for them.

Pennywise

Generali wrote: »

I don't blame farmers for taking subsidies. After all if the Govt subsidised hedge fund workers, I'd be the first in the queue. I blame Govts for giving them and the electorate for voting for them.

I quite agree - if anyone is handed money on a plate they would take it. No different to grants in other areas of the economy, subsidised child-care. No different to paying family allowance and tax credits to those who don't actually "NEED" them. No different really to free healthcare, state benefits, etc. It is human nature to take what's on offer. Who wouldn't?

Turning to farmers specifically though, if there was a free market, then everything would be different. If producers and buyers were free without state interference, prices would be different and the commodities would be different. Unfortunately, Govt have interfered for decades, meaning that production and prices are completely artificial, hence the apparent need for subsidies.