Own up. Do you regret it

meanmachine_2

For my area, London, all "surveys" are negative, and have been for some time.

But you're right - newspapers are a terrible place to get your news from.

The Express has been forecasting a collapse for years. In fact, there was a time a few years ago when they had a "house price crash" every other day!

trickster

True. I remember talking to the Landlord of my local when my house had nearly 'doubled in value' (I say that tongue in cheek as I know things are only worth what someone is willing to pay).

That was about 4 years ago and we were saying how house prices can't go much higher.

Since then it's 'value' has almost doubled that.

So who really knows? Nobody.

EDIT: But I certainly don't regret buying in 1997!

Bestthingsinlifearefree

Sure some surveys say up / some say down Why not rely on the actual prices house really sold forin the real world.

Below are the latest official Land Registry figures which show the real prices house sold for:

Average house price Eng and Wales https://www.landregistry.co.uk (ie what prices actually sold for).

Q1 2004 WAS £166,404

Q1 2005 WAS £183,486
Q2 2005 IS £184,924

As you can see average prices went up slightly in Q2 2005 over Q1 2005 but in the main are stable.

gallygirl

STOP WORRYING!!!!!

Have just heard on news that M & S sales figures are up!!!!

Mini-recession over,,,, happy days are here again......

Shall I buy a new house or build a swimming pool.......

meanmachine_2

Bestthingsinlifearefree wrote:

Sure some surveys say up / some say down Why not rely on the actual prices house really sold forin the real world.

Are you stuck on a loop?

I know I'm repetitive, but at least I don't post EXACTLY the same thing in every one of my posts.

Desperate stuff.

Don't you know that a fall in house prices is good news for everyone, except the govt (less stamp duty) and estate agents???!

You must be a tax collector.

Ian_W

MEANMACHINE WROTE: The Express has been forecasting a collapse for years. In fact, there was a time a few years ago when they had a "house price crash" every other day!

And when you actually read to-days story it's garbage. Quotes NW's figure published yesterday of a 0.2% fall [400 quid off a £200k house - crash!!] then without attributing it to Hometrack, so it reads like NW's figure, links in 14 months of house prices falling. It's really trying to push the case for interest rates to come down, as it also links in consumer spending but whoever wrote the headline didn't bother to read the story first! As they say, never let facts get in the way of a good headline!

One thing I genuinely can't understand about the Hometrack survey is how come their falls are not reflected in the land reg stats? A survey like theirs could be more up to date and responsive because the land reg stuff is historical but after 6-9 months the "falls" should be reflected in recorded selling prices. Know it's the most favourable to you MM ATM, so I'm not knocking it, just puzzled? :think:

Anyway of on me hols for 2 weeks to-morrow, :hello: confident prediction that on my return .....

There will be a house price/crash thread runnig on MSE forums!! :rotfl:

Steel_eye

Prices here in my part of the world (Didcot, Oxfordshire) are still going up, as can be seen by checking sale prices on nethouseprices.com.

The increases are not great, but each increase pushes homes further out of reach of first time buyers in what is the cheapest town in the Oxford/Reading area.

What is equally worrying is that the number of sales has dropped dramatically. My neighbour has found a buyer ten months after putting his house on the market. He has been consistently priced a few thousand lower than similar properties, and has three times dropped the asking price but only got a handful of viewings in that time. That said he has made about 8% since buying in May 2004. He needs to move to London for his work so he will need every penny of it.

If prices fall the recent fist time buyer will be in a negative equity situation. This makes it almost impossible to move, either to the next step on the ladder or location due to job changes.

Once in negative equity the choice of mortgages dissappears and he is stuck with the lenders uncompetitive standard variable rate once the introductory deal ends.

For those of us with the benefit of plenty of equity, we can ride things out easily enough. However it won't be that easy to take advantage of the smaller differential between steps on the ladder as very little will be selling, and only the best will sell.

Prices are too high, most housing chains need a first time buyer at the bottom of it. If they cannot afford it and Buy to Let is dead then we do not have a viable market.

Prices may fall, perhaps not, what is sure is that they cannot keep rising as they have done. For the market to work efficiently homes need to be affordable.

If you need to buy your first place now, then do, but take a few precautions.

With the property look at how its price has moved in recent years has it been overhyped. Is there a big difference in price between studios, one and two bedroom places. When prices are high the differntial can be small as there is a demand for the least unafforable. If prices fall then people often lose interest in studios and one beds, and go straight to the two beds, making studios and one beds difficult should you need to sell. You might need to sit out a recession, will a studio still be big enough for you in a few years time.

With the mortgage will you still be able to afford it in a few years time? You may decide to go for a long term fix, or a long term tracker which will always remain competitive. Whatever the mortgage should be flexible to allow you to move home should the need arise. A good mortgage broker/IFA should talk you through the pros and cons. Posting any questions here should bring out the issues, if not the answers.

In the long term property will rise in value, but not all movements will be upwards, but most importantly it is a roof over your head

meanmachine_2

I think it's been estimated that, if everyone was to buy their own property at current prices, the UK's debt mountain would have to be something like 4 trillion squid!!!!!

Still think the market isn't heading for a correction?

Think about it, if the coming generation are forced to buy at these inflated prices, the UK economy would be utterly devastated. There would be no money for anything other than the essentials (so at least Tesco would be OK)

The high street is already suffering. Trust me, if we don't inflate our way out of this mess, or the market doesn't fall, you ain't seen nothing yet.

kinster_2

get over it

LondonBen

Bestthingsinlifearefree wrote:

Here is some bedtime reading for you.

Over a 25 year period a HO will pay £111,000 less than a renter for a like for like property and of course the home owner gets to keep the house as well and the renter gets nothing.

http://www.moneyweek.com/article/1316/investing/other-viewpoints/ce-renting-cheaper-buying.html


Long term renters always lose, it a risk buying a property but long term renting is always greater risk.


It does not matter whether you buy in 2000 or 2005 or 2010 the moral of the
story is that in the medium to long term renting is always a mugs game and dead money.

Reluctent to let this one go unchallenged.
You say like for like property. Please let me know where you can buy a property for £155K which would cost £875 per month to rent.

I would suggest £600 per month rent closer to average Uk returns at present,
I'll leave you recalculate the figures using their formula, but there are various other points in the article I would contest.

"Renting is dead money" is a complicated debate, and cannot be summed up using the simplistic formula in this article. IMO