We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

Debate House Prices


In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide

Looking on the positive side: Why falling house prices are a good thing

12467…13

Comments

  • Really2
    Really2 Posts: 12,397 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    edited 5 August 2010 at 12:45PM
    Emy1501 wrote: »
    When they bought their flats in the 90's no one else was buying and therefore they had no real effect on demand.
    ????
    So if I buy 6 houses today that is 6 houses people cant own in the future if I hold on to them???

    I know they are you parents, but the date purchased is a red herring.
    For every house purchased and held it is a house someone else can't own.

    You are more of a bull than I am, I only have one house. If I announced on here today I am buying 6 houses as BTL I would be shot and told I was robbing from future generations.;)

    Emy1501 wrote: »
    Therefore I cant see why they are not entitled to say prices should be lower. It not their fault that properties have not been built to satify buyer demand and that banks have lent to people who they should not of.

    I see it the builders, not owning 6 properties then. :)
  • Emy1501
    Emy1501 Posts: 1,798 Forumite
    Really2 wrote: »
    ????
    So if I buy 6 houses today that is not 6 houses people cant own in the future if I hold on to them???

    I know they are you parents, but the date purchased is a red herring.
    For every house purchased and held it is a house someone else can't own.

    You are more of a bull than I am, I only have one house. If I announced on here today I am buying 6 houses as BTL I would be shot and told I was robbing from future generations.;)

    I'm not anything. I'm a bull if I want prices to rise and keep rising especially above inflation. I dont it has little interest to me. The HPI in my parents properties does not exist until they sell which its unlikely they ever will. If prices were cheaper then the interest rates on my mortgage etc would be cheaper.

    Are you suggesting that there should be no rental properties? Do you really think everyone wants to own?
  • StevieJ
    StevieJ Posts: 20,174 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    Emy1501 wrote: »
    Therefore I cant see why they are not entitled to say prices should be lower. It not their fault that properties have not been built to satify buyer demand and that banks have lent to people who they should not of.

    The simple fact is your parents owning six houses for the past 15 years+ has reduced the available housing stock for sale in that time, I have no problem with that but not too keen on the hypocrisy.
    'Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers visible or invisible giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the worlds wealthiest and most prosperous people' Margaret Thatcher
  • Really2
    Really2 Posts: 12,397 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    Emy1501 wrote: »
    If prices were cheaper then the interest rates on my mortgage etc would be cheaper.

    No they would not, are interest rates cheaper now because house prices fell?

    Base rate is.

    If prices fell 50% would they not have to drop rental prices also?
  • Emy1501
    Emy1501 Posts: 1,798 Forumite
    StevieJ wrote: »
    The simple fact is your parents owning six houses for the past 15 years+ has reduced the available housing stock for sale in that time, I have no problem with that but not too keen on the hypocrisy.

    According to Hamish BTl has increased prices by something like 7%. So are house price rises due to BTL or not? Also where would all those who do not want to buy live if there was no rental properties.

    My parents would be happy if house prices were lower. I cant see the problem with that. Some people cant get their head round BTl owners not being in it for HPI
  • Emy1501
    Emy1501 Posts: 1,798 Forumite
    Really2 wrote: »
    No they would not, are interest rates cheaper now because house prices fell?

    Base rate is.

    If prices fell 50% would they not have to drop rental prices also?

    If house prices were 50% lower I would be paying ie 5% on 50% of the loan.
  • StevieJ
    StevieJ Posts: 20,174 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    Really2 wrote: »
    No they would not, are interest rates cheaper now because house prices fell?

    Base rate is.

    If prices fell 50% would they not have to drop rental prices also?

    I am a bit confused about that, are rents now only the same now (adjusted for inflation) as they were in 1994/5 when the housing market was at rock bottom? Any LL answer that one?
    'Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers visible or invisible giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the worlds wealthiest and most prosperous people' Margaret Thatcher
  • Emy1501
    Emy1501 Posts: 1,798 Forumite
    StevieJ wrote: »
    I am a bit confused about that, are rents now only the same now (adjusted for inflation) as they were in 1994/5 when the housing market was at rock bottom? Any LL answer that one?

    What my parents get is pretty much the same if inflation is taken out.
  • Really2
    Really2 Posts: 12,397 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    edited 5 August 2010 at 12:55PM
    Emy1501 wrote: »
    If house prices were 50% lower I would be paying ie 5% on 50% of the loan.

    Not what you said.
    Emy1501 wrote: »
    If prices were cheaper then the interest rates on my mortgage etc would be cheaper.
    The IR rate is not cheaper it is the purchase price. But I now get what you mean.
  • chucky
    chucky Posts: 15,170 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    Emy1501 wrote: »
    Its about yields for them not about HPIIf prices go down they are likely to back up at sometime.
    let me get this right... they're only in it for the yield...

    they earn a yield of 5% but property drops by 10%.... they're really going to be exclusively into BTL just for the yield...
    Emy1501 wrote: »
    My parents would be happy if house prices were lower. I cant see the problem with that. Some people cant get their head round BTl owners not being in it for HPI
    sorry to put it so bluntly but you're parents were in it to make money and to make profit through investing in property.

    nothing else - they were fueled by wanting to make money.
This discussion has been closed.
★ ★ ★ Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 354.6K Banking & Borrowing
  • 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 455.5K Spending & Discounts
  • 247.5K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 604.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 178.5K Life & Family
  • 261.8K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.
Update Your Picture