Rics - worse figures since 1996

SquatNow

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

There is also not a shortage of property out there that is unoccupied and waiting to be lived in and or renovated

An ideal oportunity for people to squat. And if you find a property that is owned by a big investment fund (check you local land registry) you can be assured that the owner couldn't care less about you squatting, as long as you don't burn the place down, or even if you do as long as you don't sue them over the burns you received...

subjecttocontract

jaype wrote: »

Is that the Europe where rents are substantially lower than the UK and you don't have the uncertainty of being turfed out of your ear every 6 months? )

I think you've taken just one aspect of renting in Europe and chosen not to consider any others. Lets take the German model....3 year rental contracts. Tenant pays for new kitchen on moving in and is required to redecorate complete property before vacating. Many landlords here would be happy to accept lower rents in exchange.

MissMoneypenny

subjecttocontract wrote: »

Once the banks liquidity is sorted out......some action took place on that today.....normal service should be resumed.

Things must be really dire, judging by the action that took place yesterday.:eek:

MissMoneypenny

subjecttocontract wrote: »

I think you've taken just one aspect of renting in Europe and chosen not to consider any others. Lets take the German model....3 year rental contracts.

Why are 3 year rental contracts a bad thing? Didn't I read on these forums, that if the tenant moves to a different area for work, then they are let out of the tenancy? Or was that France? Or Germany as well?

MissMoneypenny

epz wrote: »

if 70% of the population is forced to rent cause of investors and banks you can damn well bet local council planners will get b!tch slaped if they even try to constrict supply.

Especially if welfare are paying for those rents. Although welfare won't pay investors high rents as they won't be able to afford it.

subjecttocontract

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

Why are 3 year rental contracts a bad thing? Didn't I read on these forums, that if the tenant moves to a different area for work, then they are let out of the tenancy? Or was that France? Or Germany as well?

I'm not suggesting they are bad....they certainly work in most of Europe. The Germans have (or had) good tax incentives to help.

But, its misleading to vote for the European low rent/ 3 year security model without also considering some of the negatives to balance the view.

Sisyphus

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

Why are 3 year rental contracts a bad thing? Didn't I read on these forums, that if the tenant moves to a different area for work, then they are let out of the tenancy? Or was that France? Or Germany as well?

that was true for France when I lived there, also the tenant can leave earlier than 3 years anyway - the 3 yr term is security of tenure for the tenant not for the landlord.

Running_Horse

SquatNow wrote: »

An ideal oportunity for people to squat. And if you find a property that is owned by a big investment fund (check you local land registry) you can be assured that the owner couldn't care less about you squatting, as long as you don't burn the place down, or even if you do as long as you don't sue them over the burns you received...

If it's an ideal opportunity to squat, then why don't you? Liar.

MissMoneypenny

Running Horse. Isn't it about time you let got of this thing you have against SquatNow?

Some of us (myself included) have disagreements with others on these forums, but we learn to move on and might even find ourselves agreeing with that same poster at a later date.

carolt

teabelly wrote: »

Affordability isn't self cert under another name. You give the mortgage lender 3 months bank statements to prove what you are telling them! The 3x salary metric is outmoded and isn't reflective of ability to pay at all. Lenders also take into account existing credit so under your idea some fool with 20k credit card debt on £25k pa could borrow the same as some sensible person on £25k with 20k saved and no credit card debt. I think you are confused as a self cert mortgage product is something entirely different to lending on affordability.

Wages can be decent up here. Average wage in London is only £5k more pa than the rest of the country so your example isn't necessarily reflective of what is going on. Peanuts is relative anyway. A shoebox in London is more than a 3 bed terrace in Manchester so if you went back down south for a few extra K then you are much worse off anyway.

Interest rates will not go back up to 8-10%. The max the BOE will dare raise them to would be about 6% and even then they know they'd be at risk of committing financial suicide. Plus the BOE has just realised that what they do with rates won't necessarily be reflected by lenders. If they want lending rates to lower then they have to improve liquidity. Messing with interest rates won't do diddly if the banks won't lend to each other.

Sorry, but you're wrong again, on all three counts.

Firstly, I was offered a mortgage based on affordability criteria and I wasn't asked to prove anything at all.

Secondly, a shoebox in Manchester, where we were living, is now worth the same/almost the same as in the pleasant village I live in, commuting distance to London. Average wages are much higher here as are the range of jobs and ease of getting them. I frequently check on rightmove re the price of houses where we used to live, so can make direct comparisons.

Your final paragraph makes my point rather well - even if bank interest rates go up nowhere near as high as 8-10%, mortgage rates may well reach those levels because of the credit crunch. Most SVR's are now in the region of 7.5% I believe - so not a whole world away from 8%. And as I said, no MIRAS now.

Do check your facts first....